mani
Well-known
Here's an attempt to see whether the collective expertise on the forum can clarify the questions around how best to setup a DSLR 'scanning' apparatus using internationally available off-the-shelf components:
- what the potential problems can be
- what combination of equipment would give the best results
- doesn't require engineering expertise or special tools to put together
Here's my initial thoughts for a relatively cheap camera component:
- the Olympus shift-sensor in the new Pen F effectively gives 80 megapixel RAW images
- the Olympus m.ZD 60mm f/2.8 macro lens seems to have been a favorite macro amongst a number of reviewers two or three years ago. Maybe it's been superceded by now?
So that's the easy (GAS) part. (opinions?)
Now - which copystand (that's generally available) gives the best stability and durability?
What are the issues considering height and adjustability for different formats? (6x6 or 6x9 in 120 as well as 135)
Are bellows or some other stray light-shading needed?
What's the best way to illuminate the negative from underneath? (esp considering a cool lightsource to avoid film-popping)
Film-holders for different formats?
All of these things are open to discussion - but I'm hoping we can all aim to keep it constructive, and make an attempt to come up with a sort of 'model' or 'ideal' setup for a reasonable price that present and future forum members can use as a reference for creating their own home 'scanners'.
I'm hoping we can steer clear of descriptions that include lathes, metalwork, 3D printing or degrees in Engineering. And also people who sneer at anyone lacking any of the above.
Thanks!
- what the potential problems can be
- what combination of equipment would give the best results
- doesn't require engineering expertise or special tools to put together
Here's my initial thoughts for a relatively cheap camera component:
- the Olympus shift-sensor in the new Pen F effectively gives 80 megapixel RAW images
- the Olympus m.ZD 60mm f/2.8 macro lens seems to have been a favorite macro amongst a number of reviewers two or three years ago. Maybe it's been superceded by now?
So that's the easy (GAS) part. (opinions?)
Now - which copystand (that's generally available) gives the best stability and durability?
What are the issues considering height and adjustability for different formats? (6x6 or 6x9 in 120 as well as 135)
Are bellows or some other stray light-shading needed?
What's the best way to illuminate the negative from underneath? (esp considering a cool lightsource to avoid film-popping)
Film-holders for different formats?
All of these things are open to discussion - but I'm hoping we can all aim to keep it constructive, and make an attempt to come up with a sort of 'model' or 'ideal' setup for a reasonable price that present and future forum members can use as a reference for creating their own home 'scanners'.
I'm hoping we can steer clear of descriptions that include lathes, metalwork, 3D printing or degrees in Engineering. And also people who sneer at anyone lacking any of the above.
Thanks!
bmattock
Mentor
Sounds like a noble effort. I'm sure something can be built - many have built their own homebrew tools for taking digital images of negatives, slides, and prints, so clearly it can be done.
I will follow this thread with interest. I'm afraid I don't have the necessary knowledge to contribute much, but I wish you and contributors the best of luck.
I will follow this thread with interest. I'm afraid I don't have the necessary knowledge to contribute much, but I wish you and contributors the best of luck.
bmattock
Mentor
Here's something someone made that makes sense to me:
http://www.diyphotography.net/scanning-film-negatives-with-a-dslr/
I suspect a 'flat-field' lens might be ideal for such an effort as well, since the negative, slide, or print one is 'scanning' is indeed flat, like an optical enlarger but in reverse.
http://www.diyphotography.net/scanning-film-negatives-with-a-dslr/
I suspect a 'flat-field' lens might be ideal for such an effort as well, since the negative, slide, or print one is 'scanning' is indeed flat, like an optical enlarger but in reverse.
mdarnton
Well-known
A Durst M301 enlarger has an excellent copy stand for this--just remove the head and attach a ball head-- if you intend to not go above 120 film. Otherwise it doesn't go high enough for larger film. I bought mine for $25. Modern copy stands are cheaply made and too expensive.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mdarnton/7183241686/in/dateposted/
Most of the film in my 35mm Flicrk pages was scanned with this setup.
I believe the larger small Dursts such as the M601 have similar stands, nicer, higher, and more expensive, too. Other brands mostly won't have the detachable head and the smooth elevation crank both in the same enlarger.
Since I'm mostly scanning 35mm, I recently switched to a Nikon D7200 (no AA filter!!) with Nikon bellows and slide copy attachment (also takes film), and a 63mm/2.8N El-Nikkor. That's giving me higher quality than I got with the previous rig. That lens is amazing--I'd tried enlarging lenses before with not so good results compared with the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor. The other huge upgrade was a camera without the AA filter. I can shoot my D7200 at the same 12Mp as the D300, and the results are still easily twice as good. I will never buy another digital camera with an AA filter!
For light source I use a cheap LED movie light with a piece of 1/4" white plexiglas over it.
Alignment: this is really easy and works great: check your setup by putting a mirror on the light or neg carrier. When everything is straight, the image of the lens seen through the camera in the mirror will be exactly centered. No other way works as well. Forget levels.
The most important parts of the process are choice of lens, parallelism, and lens opening. Best aperture is easy to check with digital--just shoot a series of shots at each opening, magnify to 100% and choose the best. You'll easily be able to see the difference. If you want, hone in between stops once you get close. Be sure to check the corners! For my micro Nikkor, f7.1 was better than 5.6 or 8. For the new 63/2.8, f11 is great. Just don't bother using a normal lens if you care about quality. Supposedly there's an Apo-Rodagon-D 70mm f4 lens that's the cat's meow for this kind of work, specifically formulated for duping, but I've never seen one.
I did first set up a horizontal setup as in the article mentioned earlier, but once I'd proved the concept I found my vertical rig to be a lot easier to set up and use. The current camera/bellows/slide copier on tripod is even easier. For 4x5 and larger film I use an HP G4050 scanner. New for $175, does a better job than camera scanning for up to 8x10 film, but not so good for 35mm. It is, however, a highly underrated scanner when used with Vuescan (the HP software it come with is garbage--unworkable, in fact.)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mdarnton/7183241686/in/dateposted/
Most of the film in my 35mm Flicrk pages was scanned with this setup.
I believe the larger small Dursts such as the M601 have similar stands, nicer, higher, and more expensive, too. Other brands mostly won't have the detachable head and the smooth elevation crank both in the same enlarger.
Since I'm mostly scanning 35mm, I recently switched to a Nikon D7200 (no AA filter!!) with Nikon bellows and slide copy attachment (also takes film), and a 63mm/2.8N El-Nikkor. That's giving me higher quality than I got with the previous rig. That lens is amazing--I'd tried enlarging lenses before with not so good results compared with the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor. The other huge upgrade was a camera without the AA filter. I can shoot my D7200 at the same 12Mp as the D300, and the results are still easily twice as good. I will never buy another digital camera with an AA filter!
For light source I use a cheap LED movie light with a piece of 1/4" white plexiglas over it.
Alignment: this is really easy and works great: check your setup by putting a mirror on the light or neg carrier. When everything is straight, the image of the lens seen through the camera in the mirror will be exactly centered. No other way works as well. Forget levels.
The most important parts of the process are choice of lens, parallelism, and lens opening. Best aperture is easy to check with digital--just shoot a series of shots at each opening, magnify to 100% and choose the best. You'll easily be able to see the difference. If you want, hone in between stops once you get close. Be sure to check the corners! For my micro Nikkor, f7.1 was better than 5.6 or 8. For the new 63/2.8, f11 is great. Just don't bother using a normal lens if you care about quality. Supposedly there's an Apo-Rodagon-D 70mm f4 lens that's the cat's meow for this kind of work, specifically formulated for duping, but I've never seen one.
I did first set up a horizontal setup as in the article mentioned earlier, but once I'd proved the concept I found my vertical rig to be a lot easier to set up and use. The current camera/bellows/slide copier on tripod is even easier. For 4x5 and larger film I use an HP G4050 scanner. New for $175, does a better job than camera scanning for up to 8x10 film, but not so good for 35mm. It is, however, a highly underrated scanner when used with Vuescan (the HP software it come with is garbage--unworkable, in fact.)
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
The Durst pro enlargers (M900 and up) even had optional copy attachments that provide a guaranteed parallel position.
Even better: Use the enlarger colour head, placed upside down on the base board (with suitable spacers to prevent blocking the fan on enlarger heads with a top exhaust), with the lens carrier and bellows removed.
Mackinaw
Think Different
A few weeks back there was a similar thread on this subject. One guy used a lightpad as his light source. Here's a link:
https://www.artograph.com/light-boxes/lightpad-series/
Jim B.
https://www.artograph.com/light-boxes/lightpad-series/
Jim B.
mdarnton
Well-known
I have a Lightpad and two enlarger heads, but the LED light is smaller, simpler, no fuss and no cords, and cheaper if you don't already have the others. I prefer it for those reasons.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Well, if you use a enlarger column and base board, chances are that they came with a free enlarger head - a very high quality light source for exactly the right purpose.
Ronald M
Mentor
Piece of glass across two stacks of books. Mask off area not needed with duct tape.
electronic flash under for light. My old color printing filter for color control.
or put a color enlarging head under facing upward. Use the neg holders to hold the film.
Or find a bellows and slide copier attachment. Light sources the same.
If you are not old enough to have all the parts around, buy a flatbed scanner or there is a half decent scanner for around $500. I for get the brand. Model 8200.
If you have lots of t
electronic flash under for light. My old color printing filter for color control.
or put a color enlarging head under facing upward. Use the neg holders to hold the film.
Or find a bellows and slide copier attachment. Light sources the same.
If you are not old enough to have all the parts around, buy a flatbed scanner or there is a half decent scanner for around $500. I for get the brand. Model 8200.
If you have lots of t
mani
Well-known
Hi Ronald
I have a Coolscan 9000 myself - this isn't about saying "don't bother, get a dedicated scanner instead". This thread is meant exclusively for people like me who are interested in instructions for this specific alternative to conventional scanners, and who want to keep the thread positive and constructive.
Thanks!
mani
Well-known
These are really excellent contributions so far, and I really appreciate it!
At the risk of needing to be spoonfed information - I really want to just clarify how an ordinary person would convert (say) a Durst enlarger stand to securely hold a DSLR? I hope this isn't an idiotic question - I really just want to make this thread a totally clear guide for any dummy like me to be able to set this up without unnecessary problems.
In other words: when I take delivery of the lovely ebay-purchased Durst enlarger and remove the head, what's needed to attach a camera of unknown size and weight, so that it can be moved up and down the stand to allow for different formats?
PS: I just saw the posts about using the head as a light-source. Would this be cool light? Or would it possibly even melt a negative placed above it? Sorry about the idiot-level questions - the only time I ever saw an enlarger head in real life was when I was a student and tried developing and printing my own images one time - yep only once :'(
At the risk of needing to be spoonfed information - I really want to just clarify how an ordinary person would convert (say) a Durst enlarger stand to securely hold a DSLR? I hope this isn't an idiotic question - I really just want to make this thread a totally clear guide for any dummy like me to be able to set this up without unnecessary problems.
In other words: when I take delivery of the lovely ebay-purchased Durst enlarger and remove the head, what's needed to attach a camera of unknown size and weight, so that it can be moved up and down the stand to allow for different formats?
PS: I just saw the posts about using the head as a light-source. Would this be cool light? Or would it possibly even melt a negative placed above it? Sorry about the idiot-level questions - the only time I ever saw an enlarger head in real life was when I was a student and tried developing and printing my own images one time - yep only once :'(
mdarnton
Well-known
The Durst head screws on with a big knob and a screw through the enlarger carriage into the back of the head (you can see this in my photo). The screw is a standard 3/8" tripod screw, and any normal tripod head will screw onto that. It's a bit long, and I think I added a washer to the back under the knob to shorten it. I have used the Manfrotto flip-flop head shown in my Flickr post, and now use a cheap ~$25 Chinese ball head from ebay, with a standard flat QR plate. I keep the ball head locked, and put the plate on my camera straight by putting the back of the camera down on the table so the QR plate, which sticks out the back a bit more than the screen, self-aligns with the camera screen. That way I don't have to check parallelism every time.
I am not absolutely certain about other stands than the M301, which I have. I see an M800 right now on ebay that doesn't appear to have the same simple attachment, but maybe it's hidden. Ebay's flush with cheap M301s right now, though.
An enlarger head would do the job if, as Sevo said, you didn't block the air vents. I didn't use the Durst head that came with because it's a condenser head, and that is fussier to set up and will show dust and scratches more (something I don't have a problem with with the softer diffused movie light). I have an Omega color head (diffused) that would work, but it's big, has a separate power cords, power supply, etc---all a big fuss, whereas the movie light is tiny and self-contained. My objective wasn't to get off cheap, though I did--it was to set up the easiest most functional rig I could, in the least amount of space. Perhaps the Durst color head is smaller--I don't have one.
I am not absolutely certain about other stands than the M301, which I have. I see an M800 right now on ebay that doesn't appear to have the same simple attachment, but maybe it's hidden. Ebay's flush with cheap M301s right now, though.
An enlarger head would do the job if, as Sevo said, you didn't block the air vents. I didn't use the Durst head that came with because it's a condenser head, and that is fussier to set up and will show dust and scratches more (something I don't have a problem with with the softer diffused movie light). I have an Omega color head (diffused) that would work, but it's big, has a separate power cords, power supply, etc---all a big fuss, whereas the movie light is tiny and self-contained. My objective wasn't to get off cheap, though I did--it was to set up the easiest most functional rig I could, in the least amount of space. Perhaps the Durst color head is smaller--I don't have one.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
For a L605? The proper camera adapter is called Durst SIRIOCAM - http://www.ebay.de/itm/Durst-Sirioc...384156?hash=item464650635c:g:uN8AAOSw5IJWcI9I
The L305 equivalent might be called NERIOCAM - and there are similar adapters for the pro series as well.
Fan cooled (colour) heads are generally safe in any position unless you block the fan ducts. I would not use passively cooled heads the wrong way up - at any rate not without installing a cooling fan (which won't be that hard to do, as a repro light source must not be as light tight as a enlarger) and testing the temperature at the film gate.
toyfel
Established
probably only useful to OP as prices vary depending on location
Kaiser copy stand R1 type 5520 recently bought new from dealer in Germany
377 EUR + 15 EUR shipping to Sweden
Kaiser copy stand RS 2 XA type 5411 redently bought new from dealer in Sweden
2000 SEK + 150 SEK shipping
both work perfectly well for the intended use, the main difference is the max camera weight (1.5 kg for the RS 2 XA, don't remember the exact figure for the the R1 but its around 6 kg)
Kaiser copy stand R1 type 5520 recently bought new from dealer in Germany
377 EUR + 15 EUR shipping to Sweden
Kaiser copy stand RS 2 XA type 5411 redently bought new from dealer in Sweden
2000 SEK + 150 SEK shipping
both work perfectly well for the intended use, the main difference is the max camera weight (1.5 kg for the RS 2 XA, don't remember the exact figure for the the R1 but its around 6 kg)
toyfel
Established
Searching for a light and small LED light-pad I found this
Neewer® 0,6 "/1.5cm ultra-thin NWPad-22 112-LED 12W 5600K / 3200K
(batteries not included)
Reasonably inexpensive (36 EUR + 8 EUR shipping) and has everything I wanted (controlled color temperature and even illumination) for the negs I use (up to 6x9). Haven't tested it yet in practice though, Only drawback might be that it's geared for use with batteries.
Edit: I don't think this LED pad is top quality but it's hopefully good enough for my use (eventually I am hoping to add a small motorized, computer controlled x-y stage which moves the light pad and the neg-holder, thus the need for low weight)
Neewer® 0,6 "/1.5cm ultra-thin NWPad-22 112-LED 12W 5600K / 3200K
(batteries not included)
Reasonably inexpensive (36 EUR + 8 EUR shipping) and has everything I wanted (controlled color temperature and even illumination) for the negs I use (up to 6x9). Haven't tested it yet in practice though, Only drawback might be that it's geared for use with batteries.
Edit: I don't think this LED pad is top quality but it's hopefully good enough for my use (eventually I am hoping to add a small motorized, computer controlled x-y stage which moves the light pad and the neg-holder, thus the need for low weight)
Last edited:
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
So far I have not seen a single on-camera video light panel which would qualify for even illumination unless used indirectly - using them as a backlight, the dots from the individual LCDs are glaringly obvious. And I've looked at ones that were ten times that price...
lam
Well-known
Hmm, this sounds pretty similar to what I constructed to scan negatives based on another member's setup.
http://lamfoto.net/2016/01/16/digitizing-negatives-mirrorless-camera/
Do give a read, I utilize a ArtoGraph Lightpad, a Minolta copy stand, Beseler Negatrans (35 and 120 versions), Sony A7RII (though now have a D800e) and a macro lens, 90/2.8 or will be 105/2.8 soon enough.
http://lamfoto.net/2016/01/16/digitizing-negatives-mirrorless-camera/
Do give a read, I utilize a ArtoGraph Lightpad, a Minolta copy stand, Beseler Negatrans (35 and 120 versions), Sony A7RII (though now have a D800e) and a macro lens, 90/2.8 or will be 105/2.8 soon enough.
toyfel
Established
sevo
Thanks for the input!
I don't plan to place the negs directly on the LED panel. For me it doesn't matter if it has a clumsy design. Illumination. however, might be an issue even though I am planning to have a acrylic diffuser plate between the LED and the neg-holder. Time will tell if it works or not. If not I'll look for a better device and use this one for something else
Thanks for the input!
I don't plan to place the negs directly on the LED panel. For me it doesn't matter if it has a clumsy design. Illumination. however, might be an issue even though I am planning to have a acrylic diffuser plate between the LED and the neg-holder. Time will tell if it works or not. If not I'll look for a better device and use this one for something else
lam
Well-known
I use an ArtOGraph with negative carrier resting on it. Indeed there are no 'dots' to be seen.
And as pointed out, (as I own) a Minolta copy stand that is plenty rigid for A7RII or dSLR.
I'm not terribly sure why you would put an acrylic diffuser plate probably just introducing another surface for dust/require cleaning in the process.
And as pointed out, (as I own) a Minolta copy stand that is plenty rigid for A7RII or dSLR.
I'm not terribly sure why you would put an acrylic diffuser plate probably just introducing another surface for dust/require cleaning in the process.
dfatty
Well-known
nice
nice
nice setup and write up, lam!
nice
nice setup and write up, lam!