medium format transparency storage and scanning

[rhod_evans]

Anyone have any advice on medium format slide storage and scanning?

I've recently got into MF after years at the 35mm game. With 35mm it

was easy - process unmounted, cut out the rubbish, carefully mount the

good stuff and store in suspension files, then scan what I wanted to

display or print with my Nikon Coolscan.

 

Having taken up MF, I bought a box of Gepe mounts for 6x6 and some

suspension files and have started cutting and mounting my 6x6 slides

(i.e. replicating my 35mm technique). But with MF most people seem to

be saying store all of the slides in strips of 3 or 4 and unmounted.

This seems odd to me, because you're keeping your not-so-good slides

as well, and I've got into the habit of weeding out the dross. Is the

reason for keeping them in strips that there is there an issue with

scanning MF slides that are mounted (I currently have mine pro scanned

as I can't yet justify a scanner)? In other words is it easier or

better to scan MF in strip form?

I'd also be glad to hear of any advice regarding the indexing of

physical slides (in a database) and how to cross-reference this to a

digital collection.

 

thanks, Rhod

[r_hofland]

With 645 and 6x6 you have the choice of Superslides, and I do see the advantages you are pointing at, plus the small benefit of not possibly scratching your entire strip of images when pulling out for just one for viewing or scanning. This of course makes the most sense with color transparencies, and there are reasons for all of them to be left in strips since when you scan or print the film it will be a bit more stable, flatter and easier to handle.

 

My suggestion is to cull out the real garbage before cutting into strips-- that may save you a slot or two in the end. And also to only put an image into a Superslide frame IF you are intent on regularly displaying it, or intend to project it for an audience.

 

IMHO

[dickhilker]

I've been cutting out the individual slides I want to keep and storing them unmounted in compartmented storage pages. I don't know about other scanners, but my Minolta accepts only unmounted single slides in medium format sizes.

 

Since I store my printing files on CDs, I don't normally have further use for the slides, so haven't had need (yet) to index them. That would doubtless be a different story if I were a professional taking tons of pictures for clients.

[lacy_dillard]

I use a flatbed scanner, so I keep mine in strips of four frames. It just makes them easier to scan for me. I'm using Print File sheets and a binder right now, but planning on moving up to archival paper sleeves and boxes for permanent storage. I've only got about 30 rolls of 120 right now, but the more I shoot, the more I think about how I'll be storing and filing them.

 

As for weeding out the bad shots on the roll, I usually like three or four out of the twelve, so I just keep them all. I also like to go back and re-shoot unsuccessful subjects, so looking at my mistakes frequently helps me.

[charlesp]

I'm facing the same dilemma. Often I'll keep 5-10% of my 120

film from an outing. I don't see the sense in keeping all the culls

so I'm currently cutting individual slides and mounting them in

Gepe glass slide mounts. These I put in Printfile pages - a little

snug but it works. Presently. I scan these mounted slides directly

on an Epson 3200 and it works fine. I'm trying to muster the

financial courage to buy a Nikon 9000, but I' not sure if I'll be able

to scan mounted slides I hope that at least I will be able to scan

single unmounted 6x45 and 6x7 slides. I can't do that in Epson's

crappy film holder now..

[Ed_Ingold]

With medium format, you will eventually need a dedicated film scanner. With a flatbed scanner, the results are hardly any better than for 35mm, so what's the point. The cost of a high-resolution "professionally scanned" image is high enough that you can justify the cost of a film scanner in reasonably short order.

 

As far as I know, none of the film scanner manufacturers makes a holder for mounted 6x6 slides, although there may be some 3rd party versions out there. It is simpler and more compact to store the film in strips of 3 (for a Nikon 8000 or 9000). The Imacon scanners hold the film to a curved frame (which eliminates curling), so slide mounts would not work there either. Mounted slides are probably the best solution for using a flatbed scanner, since their holders leave much to be desired. However, that's a short-sighted solution.

 

There's no advantage to cutting the film into individual frames (certainly much harder to position in a scanner), nor to clip around unacceptible images. It's not what you keep, but what you publish that counts. It's much easier to cut and store film uniformly, even keeping blank frames. Once scanned, the film becomes an archive which is seldom used. You need to learn and take advantage of the digital work flow, and forget the work flow of the '60's.

 

Medium format is an expensive enterprise - cameras, lenses, film, processing and (of course) scanning. Many people don't consider the infrastructure cost when they seize on a bargain in camera gear. I find medium-format quality (and the simpler, less automated work flow) immensely satisfying. Bargain, not! You pay for what you get. Otherwise, stick with 35mm (or large format), which costs only about 1/3 as much to own and operate.

[charlesp]

"As far as I know, none of the film scanner manufacturers makes

a holder for mounted 6x6 slides, although there may be some

3rd party versions out there. "

 

It seems Nikon has a part #869M which holds mounted single

frames in 6x45, 6x7 and more. Has anyone tried it? This would

the answer for me I think.