ben_grisso

<p>thanks, I spoke with LA Flex camera, they are no longer doing Rollei lenses, and referred me to Key Camera in Colorado. Will give them a try.<br> thx<br> Ben</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,<br> I picked up a Zeiss 50mm f4 FLE lens for cheap on ebay for my Rollei Integral 2 body, and the lens is not reading the aperture correctly between the aperture display on the lens and the camera digital readout.<br> For example, if the lens is set on f4, the body might say f5.6. And when you click all the way over the A, it will read f36 instead of A. The problem is intermittent, and usually if you mess around with the lens and body for a minute (by rotating the aperture ring back and forth) you can usually get them in synch.<br> Reading other questions on the forum, seems like a relatively common problem with these lenses. I sent it to pro camera for repair and they said they couldn't fix the problem, felt like maybe an electrical component needs to be replaced.<br> I wondered if anyone else has successfully repaired this issue? I could try another repair shop. The lens is the FLE version, and in good shape otherwise. It's not worth a lot, but I hate to throw it away, if I could repair for a reasonable amount, would prefer to flip it on ebay, but don't want to pass along a problem to any other buyers, so would need to be confident the issue is fixed.<br> Any advice appreciated.<br> thx<br> Ben</p>

<p>Most of my 6x6 negs are multiple exposure. The default scans with Nikon software and 9000 scanner come out pretty light. With adjustments after the scan in photoshop I can get good prints, but it would probably be better to get the original scans into more optimal zone and require less manipulation of the data after the fact (I do always scan 16 bit to help with this).<br> When I did my scans I was too lazy to preview first, then apply curves or other adjustment, then scan, instead I just hit the scan button each time without preview, as this was much faster, and the results OK.<br> I just opened some of the raw scans (TIF) in the nikon software and noticed it allows you to do the same kinds of adjustments (curves, etc) on the file AFTER it has been scanned as it does before. I'm wondering if this is kind of like a raw file, that you can non-destructively edit with whatever information the scanner has captured and is available in the nikon software, or is the nikon software simply adjusting the image like any image editing software (photoshop) would do?<br> As I type this it sounds like wishful thinking and I'm almost positive it's just editing the image like photoshop, but I wanted to check before I take the time to go back and do custom scans of each individual neg, using preview and curves prior to the scan.<br> <br />thx<br> Ben</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,<br> I modified my 869S carrier to accept focal point glass. In the process of removing the film clamps, I misplaced the two small black screws that hold down one side of the sliding film clamp mechanism. While this modified carrier works for getting full frame 6x6 scans, I recently purchased the 869GR carrier and that works much better.<br> I would like to return my 869S carrier to stock condition, and need to try and replace these missing black screws. Does anyone have some they don't need anymore, they would be willing to sell me? Or maybe mail me one so I that I could find a proper replacement, and I could mail it back to you? Or even just provide me with some specs or detailed photos that would allow me to find replacement screws without having an original in hand?<br> Any suggestions appreciated.<br> thx<br> Ben</p> <p>PS I tried calling Nikon tech support, but after two hours on hold, I gave up. Even if I was able reach someone on the phone, I suspect that would not be able to help.</p>

<p>The solution to this problem is to use the 869GR carrier. Create your own custom mask (that mimicks the hole pattern of the stock 6x6 mask). works great! too bad it only took me two years, and tons of testing with the 869S, 869G, and 869GR carrier. Now I can actually get started on scanning my negs instead of trying to solve this problem.</p>

<p>just to close the loop on this, for anyone else in a similar situation, the 869GR DOES allow for full frame scans of 6x6 film, including mine which is on the larger side. As Jeff indicates above you can just make your own mask, mimicking the hole pattern of the stock 6x6 mask, and the capture area is more than sufficient to get black on all four sides. Works like a charm, very little fuss. Of course it means you are scanning one frame at a time, not strips, so not good for volume work, but if you need full frame, it's better than what I was doing before where I modified the 869S carrier with glass and used that (it did work, but very finicky to position and tons of rescans due to the film shifting in the carrier).</p>

<p>thanks for the feedback Jeff. What you are suggesting is basically in alignment with my own experience and understanding. One thing to keep in mind is that I am concerned not only about the "width" as you use the term in your post, but also the "height". I believed the max sensor height is 57mm, and I rely on your testing for the max width, I have not experimented with this.<br> I agree the 869GR gives me the mostly likely solution with the least amount of work. I have already modified the 869S and achieved full frame, but the solution is finicky and slow to use, so I need something easier and faster. I think I could modify the 869G, but this seems like a pain, so I'm hoping to get the 869GR and simply modify the mask itself, which should be far easier than messing with the plastic and glass.<br> Anyhow, I need to purchase the 869GR, and test it, will post results back here when I am at that point.<br> thx<br> Ben</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,<br> I have been trying to get full frame scans of my 6x6 B+W negs for a while now. I am shooting with a Rollei Integral 2 and the negative size (56mm) seems larger than most other 6x6 brands, so I am having a harder time than most. I have purchased a Nikon 9000 and modified the 869S carrier by removing the grips, grinding out 1mm of the plastic, and putting focal point glass in. This has allowed me to get full frame for the 1st time, it appears the max size the sensor can scan is 57mm, so I have about half a mm on each side, the position has to be VERY precise.<br> Although this modified carrier works, it's very finicky and slow. I'm trying to come up with a better option. I just purchased an 869G carrier in the hopes this would be more user friendly, sadly the stock carrier opening is 56mm so I would need to remove both pieces of glass and grind out both pieces of plastic, not sure I want to go through all that.<br> My last thought is regarding the 869GR. Somone that has this carrier, can you please tell me:<br> <br />1) what is the max size opening (ie if you put in on a light table, the size of the opening the light comes through). I asked this same question of the person selling the 869G on ebay and they told me 57mm. In reality that is more the physical size of the opening, rather than the size that light can pass through,which is 56mm. That extra 1mm makes all the difference in the world to me. I am hoping the stock 869GR might have a larger opening compared the 869G.<br> <br />2) what is the size of the 6x6 mask which must be used with the 869GR, and assuming it is smaller than my negatives (56mm) does it look like it could be enlarged to 57mm opening and still keep it's structural integrity as one piece?</p> <p>3) can you place a strip of 3 6x6 frames in the 869GR, and if so, can you scan the middle frame? Or can you only scan a strip with 2 6x6 frames? Most of my negs are in strips of 3 and I would hate to cut them all into 2's and 1's.<br> <br />4) my 869G carrier did not come with masks. Does anyone have suggestions for something that can be used to replace the stock mask material? I was thinking maybe black post-its, or black construction paper, etc?</p> <p>any info much appreciated.<br> thx<br> Ben</p>

<p>PS.....it was the strip film offset setting in the scanner extras which solved the problem. I tried it before but when I hit reload thumbnail it did not update the full screen preview, and I didn't realize it was only updating the small thumbnail, so I didn't realize it was actually doing something</p>

<p>Thanks for the feedback everyone, that has solved my problem. The only challenge is that it can be hard to tell from the small thumbnail if I have the settings correct for black on all sides, and it's quite slow to get the full screen preview, which means it can take a few tries to get it right, but I can live with that.<br> At least I am getting a true full frame scan! It has taken a lot more work than I expected. But I have been able to prove two things to my satisfaction that I was not sure about before:<br> 1) at least with my negs, it is absolutely necessary to use two pieces of glass. So far using the less expensive focal point glass with the standard strip carrier seems to be working fine, which saved me a lot of money compared to buying the 869G carrier.<br> 2) again with my negs, which seem to be larger than others so far that have responded to my questions, it is possible to file out the nikon strip carrier and the CCD is able to capture a larger scan area.<br> Now I can actually start scanning all my negs for the first time, which looks to be a very time consuming process.</p>

<p>I have been working for a while to get full frame scans of my medium format B+W negs (Rollie camera). With forum members help we were able to figure out that my neg size was slightly larger than typical, which meant I was not getting full frame on all 4 edges with the stock Nikon carrier. I was able to file out the neg carrier slightly (about 1mm) and yay, now I am getting full frame on all sides (barely).<br> my next problem, aside from how precisely the negs have to be sitting in the carrier (this is using the 869S, with focalpoint glass added) is that nikon software pre-determines the scan area for each frame, and it typically will be black on 3 sides but not on one edge. This is in the thumbnail preview, using the 6x6 setting. With the setting it will accurately locate multiple 6x6 frames on a strip, but not precisely enough to get the full frame I want on all 4 edges.<br> Changing the setting the 6x7, I am sometimes able to get black on all sides, however it's just a roll of the dice each time I preview the thumbnails, how accurately Nikon software chooses to place the crop area around each frame. I don't seem to have any control over this, and so I just have to keep trying over and over, using the 6x7 setting, until it happens to work. Using the 6x6 setting I have not gotten it to work yet.<br> Does anyone have suggestions? Trying to scan many rolls of film this way seems like it would take forever.<br> The other thing I tried was using the vuescan software. This seems to just give me a preview of part of the entire strip, and lets me place the crop area, so that is better. However with two frames loaded it only seems able to scan about 1 frame, plus a third of the second frame, and I dont seem to have any control over this. I assume it should be able to scan the entire length of the film carrier? And then let me manually chose multiple crop areas in that preview? So perhaps this is a better option since it does not force me into pre-determined crop areas, if I can get it to preview multiple frames.<br> I'm not sure if I'm missing something obvious, but any help is much appreciated.</p>

<p>QG, thank you for that information. I didn't measure my stretch holder before taking it apart, I think I was getting 56mm at the "widest" but I would have to put it back together to check that.<br> hmmm, sounds like I am out of options unless I come up with a custom solution. I'm surprised and disappointed that a product geared around medium format scanning has this problem.<br> I welcome feedback. I guess I could try filing out one edge of the carrier to try and expand the aperture in the hopes that extra space would be captured by the CCD. In my picture above you can see a strip of white/grey on the left side, which I'm hoping to access by modifying the carrier.<br> It seems the max pixel dims on the scanner are 8964. My neg (at 56mm) takes up 8800, which leaves 164 extra pixels, which is almost exactly 1MM. So at best I could have one half mm on each side of the neg, which is going to be extremely finicky to position in the carrier for each frame.<br> Why do they have to make this so hard. lol.</p>

<p>Thx QG for checking the measurements.<br> My negs (rollie) are only 56mm, which is very confusing because it's smaller than your hasselblad and yet you posted a picture in this thread showing full frame side to side on your film with the 869S carrier.<br> my 869S carrier did not allow for full frame and in fact I had to partially disassemble it in order to even physically create the potential for full frame.<br> very confusing. Are you sure your frame size is 56.5mm ?<br> are we looking at variations in the 869S carrier itself (that seems really unlikely?)</p>

<p>So my 9000 is here, with the 869S carrier. I got it up and running on Windows 7, using the latest Nikon scan software and the workaround that others have posted.<br> <br />The first thing that is clear is the size of the full frame from my camera (Rollie) does not fit in the 869S carrier. The second thing that is clear is the 869S carrier also does not keep the film flat evenly across the entire plane, and so the sharpness of the grain varies in different areas of the scan.<br> Based on others feedback so far, I already suspected both of these issues were likely, so no surprises there.<br> The next step was the convert the 869S to a glass carrier using two pieces of focal point glass, regular on the bottom and AN on the top. The first problem here is that removing the two stretch grippers from both sides of the carrier does not increase the usable scan area (meaning my full frame is still not visible in the carrier with these two items removed). This required me to further remove the entire stretching mechanism (with the clamp, etc). This frees up a lot of potential scanning area on the side where it was removed, however the film and glass are not supported on that side. Using the glass sandwich though, I didn't feel like this was an issue.<br> <br />So, using the above setup I can now physically SEE the full frame of my neg, but when I go to scan it, the scanner does not capture it. I do not see any way in the software to adjust the size or position of the capture area (aside from using the strip film offset, but that only controls the space between frames, which is the opposite axis to which I am trying to capture full frame, which is "side to side" not "top to bottom".<br> <br />It appears in the scans that there is some wasted (white) space around the full frame (black) on one side of the scan, and if I cannot adjust either the capture size or position, it's possible if I grind that edge of the plastic carrier, I might be able to capture 1-2 mm of usable space.<br> Here is an example of what I have on the moment (which is black on three sides).<br> <img src="http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k512/b_grisso/eca7d105-f32a-45f7-a61b-2e31f76cfa63_zps291ips6f.jpg" alt="" width="999" height="1024" /><br> <br />QG, I believe you have both the 869S and 869G carrier? Could you kindly tell me if the visible area in the 869G is any wider than the 869S, or if it's simply using the same base plastic platform? If the 869G is wider, it might be easier to go that route. rather than trying to completely modify my 869S carrier. If it's not any wider, I might have no choice.<br> I welcome any feedback. I assume other people have run into this problem. Surely it's possible to get full frame 6x6 scans on the Nikon 9000 ?!?!</p>

<p>Two other questions...<br> <br />1) software - I either will get nikon software running on an old XP machine, or try to get vue scan running on a newer windows7/8 machine. Any thoughts between the two options?<br> <br />2) I think Nikon carrier comes with masks (is that just the glass versions, or the strip carrier also?). Can I get by without them if I use focal point glass conversion?</p>