Відео

Good music in the darkroom is a requirement. ;)

You're welcome. Hope you enjoyed it.

:) It was a good adventure. I'm sure you would be just fine.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

Depending on what you are trying to achieve, you could do that but you won't get the resolution or sharpness for high quality prints. One image I had printed recently would have been the equivalent to a 100+MP camera. The other factor involves the advantages of light passing through a liquid vs. though air. You get less scattering of light plus the negative remains much flatter.

@@alanmcconnell7368 If recall, I think someone was claiming 240+ mp using a multishot-stich method on a 36mp sensor. With that said, I also think the newest crop of pixel-shift cameras could do this in one take - whereas a multi-stitch methods on a modest sensor could potentially exceed most scanners in existence. As for liquid and air, I believe the same rules apply for this method as well - though I guess it would ultimately be up-to the individual conducting the work to choose their mounting method. Though all in all, and if memory serves, the last time I read about this method, some people were scanning(if we can call it that) at the limits of the film grain as shown here: ua-cam.com/video/PXy7RJwIBAo/v-deo.html

The tape is from Aztec and it works well for me. When I first started doing this, I didn't think the tape was that important. But using it allows me to use more time and not having to worry about evaporation.

Soon after hanging up the film, I will see some residue. However, after some time, it seems to be all clear and completely evaporated. I haven't noticed any other changes in the film, at least so far. In regards to the air vs. wet scanning, it's a similar affect with high magnification on microscopes when they use oil immersion lenses. When light passes through a liquid, there is less scattering of light.

I like doing it this way. When I have a developing day, I always have good music playing and the room totally dark. Kind of a peaceful feeling.

The company says you can use it a couple of times, but I only use it once. I do cut the sheet in half before I use it, so I get 2 scans.

Alan McConnell oh, good news then!) Does the liquid leaves any residue when it evaporates so it is hard to reuse the mylar film?

The fluid evaporates rather quickly, so when I've completed the scan, I hang the film up as if I've just finished developing. When I first starred scanning, I didn't think the tape would be necessary, but due to the quick evaporation, I soon learned the importance of taping.

Thanks Alan. My largest format is 5x7. It looks like this will be fine with that holder. All the best for 2018!

No. Once I'm done with the scan, I hang the film up like I did when I developed. After it's completely dry, I store it away. The fluid is designed for film.

I find there are a couple of important reasons to do this, particularly with LF film. First of all, it helps keep the film very flat. Second, it helps to keep the light from scattering. A similar affect happens when one is working with microscopes. When you get up to very high power, it becomes necessary to use the oil immersion technique to obtain a sharp image. My master files are up around 600 MB, so I feel the need to start with the best possible scan I can do. If I was only going to produce smaller prints, I probably wouldn't need the wet mounting. A final reason to use liquid is so it can fill in the minute scratches that often occur. Hope this helps.

Thank you very much! How big is the print you do with this scanner? Does this scanner satisfy you with the result (if you do bigger prints then 11x14)?

My master file is 30 x 38 @ a resolution of 300, but I could get up to around 60 wide @200 without a problem.

Thanks Greg! Got have good music while working in the darkroom. :)