Yeah, that's why I suggested a piece of "construction paper" with a cutout for
the 110 negative to support the glass. I thought maybe mat board would be too
thick & I couldn't think of a good descriptive name for another thick but not
too thick paper ... maybe a heavy card stock?
Since scanning all of his mother's negatives appears to have been a one-time
thing I wanted to keep the cost of the additional "equipment" required to scan
those 110 negatives as low as possible.
Speaking of 110 - way back in the back of my refrigerator is a mixed block of
UN-used 110 film cartridges (wrapped in plastic & inside a Ziploc bag) that
includes maybe half a dozen Kodachrome-64.
Never going to use them now, but I did use a number of them with the Pentax
Auto-110 over the years, and I still have some of those slides. Their mounts
have the same outside dimensions as regular 35mm slides, so I have no trouble
scanning them with the Coolscan-IV & Vuescan.
On 12/16/2019 12:15:28, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
For most flatbed scanners, the focus is fixed and their DOF is such that they
can easily accommodate a mm or two of film curvature. For best results, a glass
plate works well to hold the negative flat, with the caveat that the glass
itself must be extremely clean and the thinner the better to prevent optical
effects. You have to be careful that the shiny side of the film (opposite the
emulsion side) is not in contact with polished glass (ANR glass is best, but
expensive).
My film scanning rig for medium format and Minox is a glass plate hinged over a
channel which I made from a couple of pieces of 300gsm paper and taped into
position on my flat panel light box. This nets about a 0.8mm high channel
through which the film can be drawn The light box's panel is not glossy so I
capture the negs with the emulsion side up, preventing all Newton rings, and
flip them for correct orientation in image processing. The captures are all
made using raw mode on the camera which nets the greatest flexibility in tonal
capture and editability. With my usual copy camera setup (Leica CL and one of
two or three Leica R lenses that I find useful) this nets a 24 Mpixel image (at
the limit, depending upon format proportions and/or how much 'slop space' I
want to have to make centering the negative in post accurate. If find this to
be quite good enough for most any size prints or web presentations I have in
mind, even if it's nowhere near what the Nikon Super Coolscan 9000ED scanner
could resolve from a 6x6 cm negative (and more than it could resolve from a
Minox negative!).
I can use the same setup for 35mm film formats but there I find the Nikon Coolscan V ED
is still a better choice, since it makes handling lots of frames semi-automatic (set up a
six frame strip, then say "scan" and walk away for 20 minutes while it works
and outputs both VueScan TIFF and raw files at the same time). It's not much different
time-wise for setup, just a bit more time consuming to do the actual scanning with the
carriers I have. One key thing is that with the Nikon I have the APS film scanning
carrier, and it's the only way I can scan APS film without destroying the film cassette.
For the little APS film that I have to scan, it proves to be a plus to see it retrieved
nicely.
For Minox and Disk Camera formats, the negatives are indeed teensy so I go to
the Leica Summicron-R 50mm or Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm fitted to the bellows and
have to rack out a 2.5x to 3x magnification for a decent capture. Holding the
Disk film is pain, I made a little jig with a small C clamp to hold the film
from the center hub, but luckily the disk itself is rigid and doesn't need to
be flattened or clamped. I only did Disk once or twice, my brother had one of
those cameras, and it is really very difficult to get any quality out of those
tiny negatives. Minox negs are only a tiny bit larger but the MInox lenses have
all be of superlative quality and the film is much, much easier to handle,
making getting decent results out of them far easier.
Fun fun fun... I have the last rolls of both Minox C and Hasselblad 500CM film
sitting on my desk to scan today. It's somewhat amusing: the aggregate film
area of a roll of 36 exposure Minox film is about equal to one frame from the
Hasselblad... The whole roll of Minox frames is only 32 square mm larger than
one 6x6cm film negative. :)
G
On Dec 16, 2019, at 8:21 AM, John wrote:
On 12/13/2019 21:00:07, jco...@iinet.net.au wrote:
I have the Epson V500: when my mother reached her 100th. birthday in 2018,
my brother and I scanned all of her negatives, ranging in size from 1.5inches
square to 6x9cm and going back in time to the 1900's. We were unable to scan the
110 size negs as the scanner's holders can't really hold them flat enough. The
scanner did an excellent job (I have to confess we used the Epson software for
this job!) overall, even with some really flat and mushy originals: makes me
