how to remove emulsion pattern??

<p>Hi. I'm facing difficult issue.<br>

While scanning positive films, I found "waves" on picture.<br /><br /><br>

Everything is explained by pictures.<br>

So let's begin... <br>

<br />macro close up to emulsion surface on film.<br>

<img src="http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinkles_zpsb050c08d.jpg~original" alt="" width="345" height="278" /> <img src="http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinklesa_zps267b727b.jpg~original" alt="" width="314" height="278" /><br>

if pictures are too small or you can't view them in full size, here are direct link to them.<br>

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinkles_zpsb050c08d.jpg~original<br>

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinklesa_zps267b727b.jpg~original</p>

<p>As you can see, emulsion layer have some thickness (of course it must), darker part are thicker but worst thing is, that emulsion on whole area have some waves pattern. It's tiny, hard to see with eyes and macro, but possible.<br>

And how it look after scanning? horrible.<br>

<img src="http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinklesb_zps84f46c11.jpg~original" alt="" width="428" height="415" /><br>

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinklesb_zps84f46c11.jpg~original<br>

scanning with emulsion up doesn't solved problem. so i tried to use small trick.<br>

because this one is from slide, I used distilled water and put it back into slide.<br>

From first moment getting emulsion wet until scanning was around 15 minutes.<br>

I was extremely careful to make it without bubbles. Result? See yourself:<br>

<img src="http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinklesc_zpscd0d12d8.jpg~original" alt="" width="425" height="418" /><br>

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/magy357/wrinklesc_zpscd0d12d8.jpg~original<br>

<br />Waves are still there(!), only positive point and improvement was about scratches, they completely disappear or getting much weaker. Even better than IR dust&scratch removal technology :D</p>

<p>So... Any suggestion?</p>

<p>I use Reflecta Proscan 7200, optical (max) resolution is 3600dpi, real resolution by test is very close to that.<br>

As I understand, no single flatbed scanner can compare, even manufacturer state often in specs incredible numbers such a 4800x9600 dpi. Unfortunately, this is only interpolated resolution, real optical is (depend of model and manufacturer) somewhere between 1200-2000 real dpi.<br>

So please, do not suggest me to buy such crap. :)<br />And I also have no money for something like Plustek 120 or Nikon Super CoolScan 9000. Especially if I have no guarantee, they will scan this film without those "wrinkles".<br>

regards<br>

Magy</p>

<p>May be "reticulation" - often caused by too radical differences in temperature of the different chemicals or the wash in processing film.</p>

<p>For future, try a different film processor or control your temperatures better if you're doing it yourself.</p>

<p>As JDM suggested the emulsion surface has degraded at some time, processing or storage could be the cause, even wetting the surface could make it worse. However, if you can wet the film and do a scan using a wet process it may be the way to minimize the effect.</p>

<p>Hi guys.<br>

I'm afraid, you're both out of sense. No offence.<br>

JDM - thank for advice, but you fully missed the point of my request. There will be no more "for future", I'm just scanning present family archive and need solve THIS issue.<br>

Jeff - I think you didn't read all my article. Please do it again, you found information, that wet process you suggest I ALREADY DID. Did you notice that? And did you notice, except wipe out some scratches, has no any effect for that "wrinkles"?<br>

I'm sure, there have to be some answer. Perhaps how to make emulsion surface flat...? Or some trick to convince scanner do not see those wrinkles?<br>

However, thank for your effort both, even it's not very usefull. :)</p>

<p>You may be expecting too much from any scanner. Even a well aligned high end professional scanner can't make obvious textures or palpable patterns disappear. That's why heavily textured prints - pebbled, canvas or weave type surface papers - caused problems for scanners. Sometimes the only way to minimize the surface texture in order to reproduce the actual photograph was to set up a copy camera and lights to minimize shadows from textures.</p>

<p>You seem to have some negatives or slides with unusually heavily texture emulsions. A scanner can only copy what it sees. If the textures produce regular patterns the scanner may also produce some moire or interference patterns.</p>

<p>To minimize those problems you might try another wet scanning method. There are <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/isf_scanner/discuss/72157632056561490/"><strong>several discussions online</strong></a> and tutorials for using <a href="http://www.aztek.com/KAMI_FAQ.html"><strong>KAMI products</strong></a>, mineral oil and other methods.</p>

<p>Well, Magy, future or not, I still think it's reticulation, that is, in the film not the scanner or whatever, which was my point. You're entirely welcome.</p>

<p>Have you tried some noise removing software such as Neat Image? Software such as this can identify repeated patterns and can be adjusted to remove them, though sometimes at the expense of some sharpness. I did this when scanning some older photos that had a texture on the surface. </p>