Epson v750 and medium format film scanning

[toby1]

Hi all. First time caller, long time listener.

I recently purchased an Epson v750 for scanning medium and large format.

Firstly, the thing is amazing: here is a link to a full frame 4x5 chrome and a

100% crop of the eye. I didn't scan at highest resolution, but I did use the

multi-scan option in silverfast (which blows) to build up the shadow detail a bit.

No sharpening or any photoshopifying at all.

 

http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/1850213

 

Here is my problem/question. Has anyone figured out a way to keep medium format

film more or less flat in the carrier? I am not interested in using the fluid

mount thing, what a pain in the neck that must be. I just need to get it

relatively flat (I can see the film strips bowing in the holder, but there is

nothing I can do about it) and I will be good to go.

I know there are some third party film holders.Any advice?

Thanks

[marek_fogiel]

Hi Toby,

 

You should definitely try Doug's MF film holder - both with the t-locks and with the anr glass. I advise you to order some t-locks in excess, as you will find that some are slightly tighter than others. This holder, once you focus it properly, makes an enormous difference, both in terms of film flatness and in terms of focus optimization. Here is the link:

 

http://www.betterscanning.com

 

BTW, I haven't used the multipass scanning so far, let me know if the results are adding some real value to the scans.

 

Ciaoo

[leonard_evens]

See

 

www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Hs4Y&tag=

 

in this same forum.

[upscan]

Hi Toby: Fluid mounting used to be a pain when the film had to be de-oiled after scanning. This is not true now of all fluids. Fluidmounting is no more complicated than making a sandwdich and less messy in fact if you use the right fluid and tools. On the whole it will save you time, not only because it will reduce digital retouching but even more important, the improvements in image quality are totally unattainable by dry scanning. Film flatness is but one of the benefits of fluidmounting but just one of many others: better shadow detail, higher color saturation and greater dynamic range being just the few. Take a look at http://www.fluidmounting.com. If you are taking the trouble to do 4X5's the extra step will reward your efforts generously.

 

As for the multi-pass option in Silverfast, I looked at the image and it did show quite good shadow detail around the glasses shadows but without the original single pass image to compare it with, I could not see the extent to which the MP option succeeded. Perhaps you can show us the original? The technique has been promoted by Silverfast but their own examples failed to convince and was curious to see your results.

Cheers,

[digitmstr]

>>a way to keep medium format film more or less flat in the carrier? I am not interested in using the fluid mount thing, what a pain in the neck that must be<<

 

It's not a pain at all. IN fact, the wet mount adapter is PARAMOUNT to extract every bit of resolution from your scanned film. Try it and you'll never go back.

[cjfraser]

I'm considering buying a V750. What holders can be used for fluid mounting? Epson provides one, so does Scanscience. Is Doug Fisher's holder with the ANR glass also for fluid mounting? (Apologies if this is a Very Dumb Question.)

 

I understand that if you are NOT fluid mounting, the extra height control from Doug's holder is a huge advantage over Epson's. But for fluid mounting, which of the three holders is preferred?

[cjfraser]

I should add that Toby, that scan you posted has just about sold me on the V750 over the Nikon 9000. Still looking forward to hearing Ellis Vener's conclusions, though.

[jtk]

Toby, all of Doug's carriers hold film very flat (can't comment on 750's carrier, never saw one). I've got an early Fisher version without glass, one with anti-newton glass, and the focusing version. They use clips to hold curved film very flat... the glass version also allows use of tape (which is no advantage IMO).

 

Focus is significant to .5mm with my old 3200. Epson obviously considers focus an issue with 700/750, as they provide a focusing carrier. What does this mean wtr the wet mount version? Does one sacrifice focus for Dmax?

[jtk]

Incidentally, Vuescan also facilitates multipass fwiw.

[digitmstr]

>>What holders can be used for fluid mounting?<<

 

The one supplied with the scanner is perfect.

 

>>Is Doug Fisher's holder with the ANR glass also for fluid mounting?<<

 

I don't think so. Glass should NOT be used for fluid monting, only phot0-grade Mylar.

 

>>I understand that if you are NOT fluid mounting, the extra height control from Doug's holder is a huge advantage over Epson's.<<

 

Epson's holders allow height adj. as well. But, I have never used Doug's so, I don't know which is more convenient.

 

Fluid mounting not only increase the resolution of your scans but, goes a very long way in hiding imperfections such as scratches, dust, etc...

[stb]

Not the same. Multi-sampling is made in one pass, eliminating any possibility of registration

error. SilverFast uses multiples passes, using an algorithm they developed in order to register

the different images.

 

Compared to Doug's holders, Epson's are rubbish. They can't hold MF film flat at all.

[jtk]

Epson's new carrier has step wedges to compensate for variations between scanners (manufacturing tolerances). Doug's carriers are continuously adjustable, ie not steps, and if 700/750 are comparable to 3200 in quality control, then that continuous focus adj would probably be desirable.

 

I can't imagine how a wet mount holder could be as accurately focused.

[cjfraser]

So, other things being equal, is the precise height/focus adjustment from Doug's holders more important, or is wet mounting more important? (I have a friend who, like Giampi, finds wet mounting indispensable.)

 

Unfortunately, of course, in practice other things might not be equal. Because of sample variation, one person's V750 might focus perfectly at Epson's default holder height, while another's might not focus well at any of the Epson holder's settings.

[toby1]

Thanks everyone for your responses.

 

Marek, I made another post in this thread about the multi scan passes, or you can just look at the same image gallery

http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/1850213

 

Julio, Thanks for your words of advice on fluid mounting. Generally my sandwhiches do not involve highly toxic and flammable liquids in a small office, but I appreciate the advice. If I absolutely cannot find another solution, I may eventually resort to that, but I suspect first I will end up with a glass carrier, and second, I would just buy an Imacon before going to fluid mounting as an abosolut last resort (at which point I would be a countdown until I managed to burn down my studio).

 

John, I think I am leaning towards one of the third party film trays you suggest. Is it your feeling that the "t-locks" of the MF holder keep the film reasonably flat, or would you suggest the glass model. The description on the website implies that you only really need the glass if you are a scanning mangled or oddly shaped film, but it would be swell if someone had first hand experience.

 

Thanks again all

[digitmstr]

Try a wet scan against a scan with the traditional film holder (whichever brand you prefer). You'll see that the wet mount comes out ahead each and every time.

[david carver]

I had a piece of anti glare picture framing glass cut to fit my MF Epson holder. I paid a couple of bucks for it. The results are amazing. I also have a Nikon 9000 and at 100% I can't tell a difference in the scans.

[fp_anderson]

In regard to film flatness is there the possibility of simply laying the film on the glass? I have a UMAX 8x10 flatbed and do this with an entire roll of film. I rarely get newton rings and if I do I can move the film a bit and re-scan. I guess this option only allows for 4800dpi but from what I read here the 6400dpi setting offers no better quality only a larger file.

 

 

F.P.

 

San Francisco