Glass carrier for Nikon 8000/9000, rotating or not, difference?

I keep see people referring to the rotating glass carrier for the Nikon

8000/9000 scanners. How and why is this one different and/or better than the

standard glass one? FH-869GR vs. FH-869G?

The rotating carrier is designed primarily for panorama shots (extra wide), and makes it easy to align the film in the holder. However, you must use one of the supplied masks, and can scan only one frame at a time.

 

The non-rotating carrier allows up to 3 6.6cm frames, 4 645 frames or 2 6x7 frames in a batch. Use of a mask is optional.

Thanks Edward. Does the use of the non-rotating glass carrier without the masks have less contrast or more propensity to flare from having area between frames not masked? Or is there really little to no difference?

Rich

<p>

I have just recently bought a Nikon 9000ED and also want a glass carrier for this scanner. Given the absence of the FH-869G in the market and the painfull price of the FH-869GR, I have ordered pre-cut glass for the standard FH-869S from <a href="https://linux19.domainnameservers.net/~fpoint5/store/agora.cgi?cart_id=8914674.12090*7J4pN0&next=20&exact_match=on&product=SCANNER_GLASS">Focal Point</a>. Im only shooting 6x7 with a Mamiya 7II so I was going to try permanently masking off clear glass on the bottom with thin black contact sheet, which will hold the emulsion side off the glass and use AN glass on the top. Has to be cheaper than buying the Nikon glass carrier.

Thanks for your response Craig. Let me know how that works out. I'm on the verge of getting a 9000 and will be scanning 6x4.5, 6x6 and 6x9 and would certainly love to avoid that huge cost of the Nikon glass carrier and hope your alternative proves worthy.

The GR is nice, you can correct for not-quite-level horizons without having to do a computationally expensive rotate operation.

The glass area is about the same width as 120 film, so flare is not an issue, nor are spaces between frames. Newton's Rings are an issue. The upper glass is A/N treated and the lower glass has an anti-reflective coating (like a camera lens) and no texture. I place the film emulsion side down and put a mask on top to create an air space. Film usually cups upward, but the spacer prevents contact with the A/N glass, which will still result in Newton's Rings. The natural curvature and matte surface of the emulsion prevents Newton's Rings on the lower glass.

 

Don't be too concerned about the price of the Nikon holder. The scanner is hardly worth while without it (and 120 film). It is a mistake to use AN glass on the bottom (the typical home-built option). The scanner is capable of resolving the texture or losing sharpness in the film. AN glass is visibly cloudy - not a good thing to have between the film and the lens.

The Nikon 9000 manual recommends placing the mask under the film. I've always done it this way and rarely get Newton's rings.

I've been using a Nikon 8000 for several years. Recently, I've been scanning with the

FH-869G. Frankly, I got wonderful scans with the standard holder; used properly, it held the

film very flat. The glass holder ensures absolute flatness, but Newton rings are a hassle.

Given the choice, I'd go with the glass carrier, but I'd also be very happy scanning with just

the standard holder.

Christopher,

 

I've tried it both ways, and the mask on top is less likely to form Newton's Rings. It wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer knew less about using the equipment than the customer.

 

Newton's Rings form when two reflective surfaces are touching or in very close proximity. Film nearly always cups or curves from the center toward the emulsion. This causes the back to arch and touch the surface confining it. If it touches the A/N glass, pale rings will form. If you place it with the back down, strong rings will form against the shiny (though coated) lower glass. The mask has one cross bar between the first and second frame. This is sufficient to prevent contact with upper glass unless the film is crimped or buckled (e.g., from improper loading of a reel). In that case, the only solution is to use the glassless holder. If necessary you can reverse the film to scan the third or fourth frame (6x6 or 645 respectively).

 

If the film lies flat (rarely in my part of the country), it doesn't matter much which side the mask goes, if any.

Edward

 

Are you suggesting that, as per the diagram, this is the preferred use rather than swapping the order of and [C]; or even using AN glass top and bottom? Just that most of what I had read on p.net to date (esp. Robert Martin's comments)<div></div>

(didnt finish that last sentence...) ...seemed to be suggesting otherwise.

Craig,

 

Your diagram is exactly what I tried to describe. If I were an artist, I guess I wouldn't be taking pictures ;-) My only MF format is 6x6, so I put one of the stickers included with the glass holder directly on the upper glass between the 1st and 2nd frames. It is the cross bar that does the trick, not the borders.

 

AN glass has a texture which does two things - it minimizes the contact area between film and glass and diffuses the reflection so that inteference doesn't occur. While not as pronouced as anti-reflective picture glass, you can see the diffusing effect. If you can see it with your eye, the scanner can certainly see it, so it doesn't belong under the film.

 

Be sure to wear gloves. Both the AN and lower glass are hard to clean.

Thanx Edward,

 

Since I wrote the last comment my parccel from Focal Point arrived so I will attempt to butcher the FH-869S tonight and see how it works... :))

 

Still need to work out how to manage/attach/hold the top AN glass in place!

I put the film on top of the mask. I haven't had any problems with newton rings yet, neither while scanning panoramic 35mm or 6x6cm.

 

I find the FH-869GR to be a great film holder, yet in my opinion, the main backdraw of this holder is that you cannot preview more than one frame at the time. In my workflow this slows things down since I would like to assess more than one negative in the preview mode before I choose which one to scan. So compared to using Epson flatbeds, the 9000 is slow to use with the rotating holder.

One problem I suffered from using 120 B&W negatives and the FH-869G (and I guess the same would happen on the GR too) is that if you have large areas of high density at the top of your negative (namely a light sky) you can get some severe banding on the 9000. At first I though that this was a scanner fault and indeed exchanged two 9000s before discovering the answer myself. You must mask off the rebate at the top of the negative totally and in a little packet floating around in your 9000 box are a bunch of adhesive strips that you are supposed to cut to size and apply to your negative. Note that these are not the little strips that you are provided with for the purposes of preserving the space between the film and the glass but something separate.

 

This particular banding issue is stupidly not mentioned at all in the main 9000 users manual but in a separate little leaflet that comes with the scanner. Even more unforgivable is Nikon UK support who, after pages of dialogue and example shots going over the details of this problem, clearly did not know of the existence of this problem or its remedy.

 

Anyway, with that intermittent problem finally resolved I have to say that the 9000 is a great scanner but to get the best from MF you really need one of the glass holders.

For those who want to construct their own glass holder, you might like to have a look at my

directions for a single glass holder for the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro:

 

http://www.scanhancer.com/index.php?art=41&men=3

 

A lot of the information applies to a single glass holder for a Nikon MF scanner as well.