I also scan my negatives in two halves for medium format. I find that scanning a rectangular negative vertically results in overlap problems where you can see the two scans not lining up on some frames after merging. I've started scanning the halves horizontally to give me better overlap.
Ha, the Tessar 2.8/50! I've tested this lens with my Sony A7 for scanning 4x5 and found it to be astonishingly good - quality was a bit all over the place with GDR lenses, but the ones labeled "Zeiss" were reasonably good (not so much those labeled Pentacon), because they where made for export. The 4 element in 3 groups designs are quite good when stopped down, no distortion (I found this for all such lenses I've used for shooting, be it Tessar, Skopar, Solinar or Xenar). A simple enlarger lens of the same design would also give comparable results (when stopped down).
Thanks very much for this video. I am "toying" with the idea of adding medium format to my photography hobby, perhaps starting off with pinhole 4x5, and who knows, maybe on to 4x5 MF/LF cameras later. I like the idea of perhaps developing my own (B&W) negatives but digitalizing them would be my preferred way to eventually printing.
I enjoyed medium format and used a Mamiya RZ67 for a while. My setup worked well for that too. If you’re only dealing with the smaller formats then you can obviously scale the setup down to suit.
I’m just getting my mirrorless camera scanning set up and I’m curious why you’re capturing your scans in two images and stitching them together versus taking a single image. Loved your video and appreciate the knowledge you’ve pass along to the community.
A single image is perfectly fine but the more sections you divide the negative up, the bigger the resulting file. Worthwhile to take advantage of the bigger formats.
Hi Russell, thanks for sharing your process of digitising of the negative. I use the scanner for that - but for some time I also digitaised film by camera. When I see your flow - I have almost the same, I also have NegativeLab Pro for me. One thing is not sits with me though - when you show merged and rotated image, the black frame (the can mask) is not perfectly straight. When you look from the camera position towards scan mask - it is straight. So if camera levelled correctly and lens does not have distortion - the scan mask frame have to be straight in the image. But I see it is not. What is going on there?
Could be the levelling. You can see it’s not a precisely engineered solution. Also the lens I use is pretty good but it’s not perfect either. I have sometimes had problems getting images to stitch and that is usually the levelling not being quite right.
@@rjphotos yes, sure. For that reason I done a specific setup (stand) that is not assembled / disassembled, but stay firm all the time. The camera just clamped to it via usual tripod bracket. After I levelled the setup - it stays this all the way. Also - to get camera up/down I used an old part from the 35mm camera bellows, where we have that moving part. Now it is possible to move camera up/down when needed.
Sorry for not replying sooner. I’ve since found better holders on thingiverse. I’m using one of those now. Have a look and I’m sure you’ll find a design to suit your needs. There are a few different variations available.
Hi, thank you very much for the video. Very interesting. Is the sharpness of the image OK ? Is there a huge difference in sharpness between this technique and scanning it with a big professional scanner ?
This is one area where a lens with excellent sharpness is useful. I’m using a macro lens that has excellent sharpness and get great results. It won’t be as good as a drum scan but it’s as good if not better than a flatbed scanner from what I’ve seen.
I use the super clamp with a manfrotto double ball joint head and umbrella mount. I set it up using a small bubble level on the camera screen to set the levels in both axis (checking that the scanning surface is also level). The clamp is attached to a generic monitor arm.
Hi Russell, would you be willing to share your film holder 3d file? Was looking at designing and printing my own, when I came across your video. Thanks. Mark.
Hi Mark. I don’t have the file as a colleague designed it and mailed me the print. Since that video I found a better one on thingiverse that I have been using. There are quite a few designs on there.
After stitching and cropping I’d say I’m getting about 36mp, but that’s stitching twice. You can go closer and stitch 4 sections but I’m not sure there’s much advantage to that. I’ve since changed my camera to an X-T5 so have 40mp so I don’t bother stitching at all now.
I have watched several videos on this topic and all seem to have to deal with negatives curling. Why not place a piece of glass over the top of the negative. It would insure all corners etc. are flat.
@@ChrisUGI picked up two sheets of "acid etched" antiglare glass from a framing shop for $20 and there are no Newton rings. It's worked well using my GFX 100 and a Pentax 645 120mm macro. The worst part (as with all scanning) is keeping the dust out.
One I’ve used before was color perfect. That was for photoshop. You can do the conversion manually in photoshop and a lot of photographers do that. I think there are a few standalone options too though I’ve not used any.
I’m in the doldrums of photography content at the moment. I have a video edited but it doesn’t have anything to do with photography so I’m not sure if I’m going to post it yet. It’s a build journal of a workbench and I don’t want to contaminate the channel with irrelevant content.
I’m using a different design now, one I found on thingiverse. www.thingiverse.com/thing:1172285 I use the first part with the indent for the negative. It works a treat.
Yet another undeclared blatant advert for 'Negative Lab Pro' a process which can be completed much better with Photoshop which comes with the Lightroom package !
Thanks Russell. Always enjoy your videos. Cheers from Alberta.
I also scan my negatives in two halves for medium format. I find that scanning a rectangular negative vertically results in overlap problems where you can see the two scans not lining up on some frames after merging. I've started scanning the halves horizontally to give me better overlap.
Ha, the Tessar 2.8/50! I've tested this lens with my Sony A7 for scanning 4x5 and found it to be astonishingly good - quality was a bit all over the place with GDR lenses, but the ones labeled "Zeiss" were reasonably good (not so much those labeled Pentacon), because they where made for export. The 4 element in 3 groups designs are quite good when stopped down, no distortion (I found this for all such lenses I've used for shooting, be it Tessar, Skopar, Solinar or Xenar). A simple enlarger lens of the same design would also give comparable results (when stopped down).
thank you! very helpful. now I have to find a friend with a 3D printer ; )
Thanks very much for this video. I am "toying" with the idea of adding medium format to my photography hobby, perhaps starting off with pinhole 4x5, and who knows, maybe on to 4x5 MF/LF cameras later. I like the idea of perhaps developing my own (B&W) negatives but digitalizing them would be my preferred way to eventually printing.
I enjoyed medium format and used a Mamiya RZ67 for a while. My setup worked well for that too. If you’re only dealing with the smaller formats then you can obviously scale the setup down to suit.
I’m just getting my mirrorless camera scanning set up and I’m curious why you’re capturing your scans in two images and stitching them together versus taking a single image. Loved your video and appreciate the knowledge you’ve pass along to the community.
A single image is perfectly fine but the more sections you divide the negative up, the bigger the resulting file. Worthwhile to take advantage of the bigger formats.
Hi Russell, thanks for sharing your process of digitising of the negative. I use the scanner for that - but for some time I also digitaised film by camera. When I see your flow - I have almost the same, I also have NegativeLab Pro for me. One thing is not sits with me though - when you show merged and rotated image, the black frame (the can mask) is not perfectly straight. When you look from the camera position towards scan mask - it is straight. So if camera levelled correctly and lens does not have distortion - the scan mask frame have to be straight in the image. But I see it is not. What is going on there?
Could be the levelling. You can see it’s not a precisely engineered solution. Also the lens I use is pretty good but it’s not perfect either. I have sometimes had problems getting images to stitch and that is usually the levelling not being quite right.
@@rjphotos yes, sure. For that reason I done a specific setup (stand) that is not assembled / disassembled, but stay firm all the time. The camera just clamped to it via usual tripod bracket. After I levelled the setup - it stays this all the way. Also - to get camera up/down I used an old part from the 35mm camera bellows, where we have that moving part. Now it is possible to move camera up/down when needed.
Nice video! It’s possible to get the file for the 3Dprint?
Sorry for not replying sooner. I’ve since found better holders on thingiverse. I’m using one of those now. Have a look and I’m sure you’ll find a design to suit your needs. There are a few different variations available.
Hi: I have 3-d printed 35mm & 6x6 film holders, any chance you would share this file?
Hi, thank you very much for the video. Very interesting. Is the sharpness of the image OK ? Is there a huge difference in sharpness between this technique and scanning it with a big professional scanner ?
This is one area where a lens with excellent sharpness is useful. I’m using a macro lens that has excellent sharpness and get great results. It won’t be as good as a drum scan but it’s as good if not better than a flatbed scanner from what I’ve seen.
Thank you for your answer. I’ll try with my hasselblad lenses. Not macro but with the crop factor on the cfv II 50 it might work just fine.
How did you set up the Super Clamp to hold the camera? It's not obvious from the video.
I use the super clamp with a manfrotto double ball joint head and umbrella mount. I set it up using a small bubble level on the camera screen to set the levels in both axis (checking that the scanning surface is also level). The clamp is attached to a generic monitor arm.
Hi Russell, would you be willing to share your film holder 3d file?
Was looking at designing and printing my own, when I came across your video.
Thanks. Mark.
Hi Mark. I don’t have the file as a colleague designed it and mailed me the print. Since that video I found a better one on thingiverse that I have been using. There are quite a few designs on there.
Thanks for the video. Stitching two images from a 4x5 negative like this, what is the maximum print size you can make?
After stitching and cropping I’d say I’m getting about 36mp, but that’s stitching twice. You can go closer and stitch 4 sections but I’m not sure there’s much advantage to that. I’ve since changed my camera to an X-T5 so have 40mp so I don’t bother stitching at all now.
@@rjphotos Thanks for the info. I’m a Fuji shooter too. I have the XT-2 and have been thinking about upgrading to the XT-5.
@@kiddeq it’s a nice upgrade if you want to benefit from the improvements in AF performance and get in body stabilisation.
I have watched several videos on this topic and all seem to have to deal with negatives curling. Why not place a piece of glass over the top of the negative. It would insure all corners etc. are flat.
It almost always produces Newton Rings en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_rings
@@ChrisUGI picked up two sheets of "acid etched" antiglare glass from a framing shop for $20 and there are no Newton rings. It's worked well using my GFX 100 and a Pentax 645 120mm macro. The worst part (as with all scanning) is keeping the dust out.
Are there any alternatives to Negative Lab Pro that do not require Lightroon?
One I’ve used before was color perfect. That was for photoshop. You can do the conversion manually in photoshop and a lot of photographers do that. I think there are a few standalone options too though I’ve not used any.
Missing seeing your videos, any coming up?
I’m in the doldrums of photography content at the moment. I have a video edited but it doesn’t have anything to do with photography so I’m not sure if I’m going to post it yet. It’s a build journal of a workbench and I don’t want to contaminate the channel with irrelevant content.
Well hopefully this will be an encouragement to get out there. Take care
Hi, nice video and a good set up. Would you friend be interested in selling a copy of your holder?
I’m using a different design now, one I found on thingiverse. www.thingiverse.com/thing:1172285 I use the first part with the indent for the negative. It works a treat.
Thank you
Yet another undeclared blatant advert for 'Negative Lab Pro' a process which can be completed much better with Photoshop which comes with the Lightroom package !
you are delusional