Scanning with a digital camera

H

Huss

Mentor
Local time
3:18 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2014
Messages
9,859
I'm getting much better results using my DSLR (D750) than I have from anything bar a drum scan. These would be even better with a higher rez digi cam like a A7Rii, D810 etc.
For 120 film I use the D750 + Micro Nikkor 60 2.8 D, + light pad + copy stand + an old enlarger film holder to hold the film flat.

Here is an example using the most unforgiving lighting for this - a heavily back lit shot in the middle of the day. Shot using a Rolleiflex 3.5 MX-EVS and Fuji 160NPS expired in July 2000.


ZeeRiverBedS-1_zpsiaexab2u.jpg


And 1:1 crop showing the detail and the grain. Yes, the AF system of the camera in Live View is able to focus on the grain.

ZeeRiverBedCUs-1_zps14zucseb.jpg


It takes me about 10 minutes to create a profile in LR for the film type - which of course I then save so I can reuse it and not have to deal with this part again. The big thing in creating the profile is to take a photo of the clear film strip, and use the dropper tool in LR to get the white balance. Once I have the profile, it takes about 20 seconds to get a full rez scan of each image. The AF works perfectly and takes the worry out of not nailing the focus. A lot of dedicated scanners are known to have focus issues.
And that's it. No messing with buggy scanning software. No dealing with a temperamental machine. And the 'scanner' also has use as a camera!
You really can use any digital camera for this, the important part is having a lens (or extension tubes) that allow you 1:1 macro focus.

It is just as good with 35mm film. Same outfit, but instead of the light pad, and copy stand I use the Nikon ES-1 slide copying adapter, a slide mount and a slave flash which I point at the camera. You don't need a slave flash, just a bright light source (sky or direct flash against a white wall would do)
This shot was taken with Portra 400:

MyLostDoorS-1_zpsjfnplljd.jpg


This one with Arista 400:

416s-2_zpsajppbuhn.jpg


Black and white film is even easier to deal with as there is no balancing colour tones. Just invert the image and adjust a few sliders for tone. Do this once, save as a profile, then you don't have to do it again for that film.
 
I do this as well, with an EM5-II and the high res mode. The only difference is I use MakeTiff and ColorPerfect (even for black and white). It makes the color correction part extremely easy. I love the results I get - cleaner than the Pakon, faster than the Plustek.

First two are M2 and either HP5 or EK5222, second two are Rolleiflex 2.8f and Portra 400.

P3010050-Edit.jpg by jkjod, on Flickr

P3150044-Edit.jpg by jkjod, on Flickr

P9080004-Edit-Edit.jpg by jkjod, on Flickr

P9080003-Edit.jpg by jkjod, on Flickr
 
While I continue to use a film scanner for 35mm most of the time, I've switched over to using the Leica SL in the same way as you do with the Nikon for medium format.

However, for the Leica (M-bayonet), there's the excellent Leica BEOON table top macro stand which has settings for 1:1, 1:1.5, 1:2, and 1:3 reproduction ratio which makes setting up to copy 6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, and 6x9 very very easy and repeatable. I've created a small card-stock jig that makes capturing and holding the film in the correct position extremely easy. I use the SL body with it, using the same M Adapter T that I use to mount M lenses (or R lenses with the R Adapter M stacked onto it).

A 6x6 neg becomes about a 16 MPixel image. I found it easiest to create a customized Lightroom camera calibration profile to do the B&W or Color inversion, the latter with automated crossover mask removal. Read in the raw files, apply the profile, do minor tweaking, and export with automatic import to 16-bit TIFF for final rendering finish.

This is a quickie capture from a Rolleiflex roll (just shooting off a couple of waste exposures before sending that camera off to be serviced last Fall) with very little other than the basic inversion and a little curve tweaking in TIFF format.

​

Not a particualarly great neg ... I'd forgotten all about the roll and found it thrashing about in the bottom of a drawer full of junk. But I had fun with it anyway. :)

G
 
I used a digital camera for a few years that was mounted on a plastic base with a Pentax slide copier(35mm) and home made 120 negative holder. The most important part for success is what you said: use a macro lens.
 
I plan to do this too in the near future. As much as I love my local lab, paying $16 for processing + CD gets expensive after awhile. I am gathering up what I need to do some Stand Developing and I'll make my "scans" with my D750 (I've copied slides this way for years).
 
I have been looking for a BEOON for a long wile now - can't seem to find them affordably.

The other thing I have found that makes scanning in this manner much more enjoyable is a "negatrans" enlarger carrier. It has a knob on it that lets me go from frame to frame with out removing the film strip. I'm thinking of getting one for 120 also because its been working so well with 35mm.

And I agree, a Macro lens is essential - I use an old Micro Nikkor 55/2.8. The other thing that is very important is to use some sort of light box. I used to use an iPad or my iPhone as the light source, and you can actually see the pixels through the negatives.
 
Looking for a little help with camera scanning

Looking for a little help with camera scanning

Dear Board,

I have an interest in doing digital camera scans but I honestly do not know where to begin to look for a simple guide to the process?

If anyone has a link to a guide that shows what is involved in setting something up from start to finish I'd appreciate it of you could post it here.

Thank you,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg, PA :)
 
It would be helpful to see examples of a camera scanned image together with the same image scanned with a dedicated film scanner image done by those familiar with both ways of scanning.
 
ptpdprinter said:
I found it difficult to focus the negative accurately, and now use a dedicated scanner.
Click to expand...

Using the auto focus in Live View with my D750 did it instantly. And perfectly. Should be the same for other digi cams w/ af.
Funny thing is I was doing the focus manually to start off with, with this same set up. I had forgotten all about the AF in Live View mode, as my normal usage with the camera is taking shots through the optical viewfinder in regular AF mode. Regular AF does not work at all for taking shots of the film. At least it does not w my camera.
I find using Live View Af focus more accurate than my mf attempts.
 
css9450 said:
I plan to do this too in the near future. As much as I love my local lab, paying $16 for processing + CD gets expensive after awhile. I am gathering up what I need to do some Stand Developing and I'll make my "scans" with my D750 (I've copied slides this way for years).
Click to expand...

That's one of the things that got me to do this. I was paying $20 for dev and high rez scans per roll. Plus shipping both ways. Plus the 2 week wait.

I already had the camera, already had the lens and initially was skeptical. But when I saw my results were better than what I was paying big bux for, that clinched it. As well as the immense satisfaction of doing it myself.

What if you don't have a digi cam? Easy answer is get one! I would never waste money on buying a scanner now, the camera functions as a better scanner and a much better camera! And oh so much quicker.

I saw that the Pacific Images 120 scanner is $1600, discounted to $1300 at some places. My D750 was $1100 (used). The lens was $250 used.
I'd get the same results with a D610 which are about $800 used. Or pretty much any other digi cam with a 1:1 lens.
 
Huss said:
I use the Micro Nikkor 60mm 2.8 D lens. That is an af lens that can do 1:1.
Works perfectly.
Just make sure to do the AF in Live View mode.
Click to expand...
The Micro Nikkor 60mm 2.8 D lens ($516.50) costs more than my dedicated film scanner (PacificImage PrimeScan XE $329), so unless you happen to already have the lens, it doesn't seem like a very viable alternative.
 
ptpdprinter said:
The Micro Nikkor 60mm 2.8 D lens costs more than my dedicated film scanner, so unless you happen to already have the lens, it doesn't seem like a very viable alternative.
Click to expand...


I paid $250 for mine, used. And you can use it as a regular lens too. It is quite spectacular.
 
Tim Murphy said:
Dear Board,

I have an interest in doing digital camera scans but I honestly do not know where to begin to look for a simple guide to the process?

If anyone has a link to a guide that shows what is involved in setting something up from start to finish I'd appreciate it of you could post it here.

Thank you,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg, PA :)
Click to expand...

Here is what I did. It worked great.

Untitled by John Carter, on Flickr
 
ptpdprinter said:
So even if you buy the lens used for $250, add another $85 to the cost, and its still more expensive than a dedicated film scanner. Well, at least there are options.
Click to expand...

Yes. But for the extra money I get perfect scans in literally seconds.
Your scanner will take minutes at the 'high rez' mode (someone had written over 10 minutes for one scan), and then you have to deal with possible banding and all the rest of the complaints other users have posted on that model.
I've read reviews of your scanner, and frankly it's what turned me off these consumer scanners.
Cheap means nothing to me if the quality is lacking. Unfortunately with these consumer scanners expensive means nothing too.
With the DSLR you get fantastic quality in seconds with normal file sizes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top