View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57850 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:07 am Post subject: Better scanning |
|
|
Attila wrote:
http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/usinginsert35.html
Any experience ? _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9098 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
The folks over at the Hybrid Photo Forums have plenty of experience with them:
http://www.hybridphoto.com/forums/
Go to the Scanners page, and post a question, or search their archives for questions about betterscanning.com.
It is my opinion, based on the photos and information provided at the BS website that their products will help sharpen your scans, but not by a huge amount. It is instead a small, but significant, improvement.
I haven't decided yet to purchase any of their products, although I probably will -- especialy their medium format template for the Epson 4990, as well as some of their anti-Newtonian glass.
That's an Epson 4990 film holder they're showing on their ANR page by the way. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
"BS" is not a happy abbreviation _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
A G Photography
Joined: 11 May 2008 Posts: 1480 Location: Bologna - Italy
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A G Photography wrote:
I have both 120 and 35mm inserts and while they make no wonder still they're very useful expecially when you have to mess with those dreaded curled film strips.
I think it was money well spent. _________________ Alessandro
My Photography Website
My Blog about Photography and Italian Cuisine
My Photostream on Flickr
--------------------------------------------------------
DSLR: Nikon d80, Olympus e410
SLR: Chinon CX, Fujica ST605n, Nikon f601, Pentacon FM, Pentax Spotmatic SPII, Praktica FX, Praktica FX2, Voigtlander VST1, Yashica FX-3, Zeiss Contaflex
RF: Altissa Altix, Zorki Ie, Kiev 4b
Medium Format: Pentacon Six TL, Zeiss Ikonta 520/2, Mockba 4, Voigtlander Bessa I, Agfa Isolette II, Agfa Isola
Large Format: Cambo SC 4x5, Rodenstock Sinaron 150/5.6, Rodenstock Rodagon 150/5.6, Schneider Kreuznach Symmar 180/5.6
Lenses
Nikkors: 28/3.5 AIS, 35/2, 50/1.8, 50/2 H, Micro 55/3.5, Micro 60/2.8, 85/1.8, 135/3.5 AI, 200/4 NAI, 18-55/3.5-5.6, 28-80/3.5-5.6, 55-200/4-5.6
CY: Distagon 28/2.8, Planar 50/1.4, Yashika 50/1.7, Sonnar 135/2.8
CZJ m42-Exakta: Flektogon 20/4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Tessar 40/4.5, Tessar 50/2.8, Pancolar 50/1.8, Pancolar 50/2, Biotar 58/2, Biotar 75/1.5, Tessar 80/2.8, Sonnar 135/3.5, Sonnar 135/4, Triotar 135/4
CZJ P6: Flektogon 50/4, Flektogon 65/2.8, Biometar 80/2.8, Biometar 120/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Meyer-Pentacon: Orestegon 29/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Lydith 30/3.5, Primagon 35/4.5, Helioplan 40/4.5, Domiplan 50/2.8, Primotar 50/3.5, Oreston 50/1.8, Primoplan 58/1.9, Orestor 100/2.8, Trioplan 100/2.8, Helioplan 135/4.5, Orestor 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5, Primotar 180/3.5, Telemegor 180/5.5, Orestegor 200/4, Pentacon 200/4, Orestegor 300/4, Telemegor 300/4.5, Telemegor 400/5.5
Schneider-Kreuznach: Curtagon 28/4, Curtagon 35/2.8, Xenon 50/1.9, Xenar 50/2.8, Tele Xenar 135/3.5, Tele Xenar 200/4
Russians: Arsat Zodiak 30/3.5, Mir-I 37/2.8, Volna-9 50/2.8, Industar-50 50/3.5, Industar-61 50/2.8, Helios 44 58/2, Helios 44-2 58/2, Helios 44-M-4 58/2, Volna-3 80/2.8, Helios 40 85/1.5, Jupiter 9 85/2, Jupiter 11 135/4
Others: Chinon-Tomioka 55/1.4, Helios 28/2.8, Isco Iscotar 50/2.8, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Ludwig Meritar 50/2.9, Schacht Travegon 35/3.5, Schacht Travenon 135/4.5, Sekor 55/1.8, Sigma MF 28/2.8, S-Takumar, 28/3.5, S-Takumar 50/1.4, S-Takumar 55/1.8, S-Takumar 55/2, Steinheil Quinar 135/2.8, Steinheil Culminar 135/4.5, Vivitar 135/2.8, Voigtlander Ultron 50/1.8, Yashica Yashinon DX 50/1.4, Zuiko MC Auto-W 28/2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6943 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
I can see how these would help with Tri-X as it is curly beyond belief. I may have to invest. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57850 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Thank you Alessandro I think I have to invest too. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9098 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
I'm wondering how well the ANR glass works with 35mm strips (besides the obvious, that is -- getting rid of Newton rings). BS does not offer any adjustable height holders for 35mm (at least not for the Epson scanners I've looked at there), just the ANR glass. So this means that if the optimal focus point is different from the standard holder's offset, the ANR glass will probably not offer much in the way of improved sharpness.
So, if you've bought the 35mm size ANR pieces, have you done any comparison scans? If so, would you care to post pics showing the difference between scans with and without the ANR glass? _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6943 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
I would be interested too.
The odd thing I find with V500 & Tri-X is that although the film is very bowed, there is no point wher I can see that focus is either better, or worse. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Neare
Joined: 09 Sep 2009 Posts: 43 Location: New Zealand
|
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Neare wrote:
It does make a difference as it keeps the film flat. Whether or not most people can make out the difference I doubt it. However, if you use it yourself, your eye becomes trained. And once you start down the path of ANR, you can never go back. _________________ Photos |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9098 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
Well, I can understand the advantage to using ANR glass when it comes to getting rid of Newton Rings, which I've had problems with.
It seems to me though that if one wants to optimize the sharpness of ones 35mm scans, one needs to buy the adjustable medium format template, adjust it to its best height by scanning medium format film, then use shims under the 35mm film strip template to place the 35mm film at the same height. But if you're scanning 35mm slides, you're SOL, since the slides rest on the glass. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6943 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
So would I see an improvement in in sharpness when scanning 35mm negs by using the glass?
I've heard that the Epson has quite a depth of field so getting the exact height is not essential. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9098 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote: |
So would I see an improvement in in sharpness when scanning 35mm negs by using the glass?
I've heard that the Epson has quite a depth of field so getting the exact height is not essential. |
One would think that Epson would design their scanners' optics such that there would be sufficient depth of field to handle issues like curved negatives. But if you look at the photos at BS's site, where they compare scans using the Epson film holder compared to the BS adjustable film holder, it appears obvious that being able to adjust the height helps with sharpness.
Several months ago, I experimented with using shims under a 35mm slide that I had removed from its cardboard mount. For shims, I cut small pieces of film from a junk slide. So, I stacked the shims under the slide and scanned it at various shim heights until I could detect a loss in sharpness. After comparing the scans, I arrived at an optimal height above the glass that was identical to half the thickness of the cardboard mount, which is exactly where the slide is located anyway.
So, I dunno . . . I think I'll try the test again and see if I get the same results. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lulalake
Joined: 22 Apr 2007 Posts: 1191 Location: Near Austin Texas
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lulalake wrote:
Yes.
If you noticed, Doug Fisher runs that company. He is also the owner of the Yahoo Epson scanner forum. I used to be a moderator there (I had to quit because of having too many other things I was involved in)
I was lucky enough to beta test the ANR glass and the adjustable 120 film holder on Epson scanners. I think that they are excellent. The quality in the holders comes from two areas.
1. The ability to adjust the holder to find the best focus on non-adjustable lens flatbed scanners. It takes a bit of testing, scanning, then re-adjusting the height, etc. etc.
2. Then using the ANR glass to flatten the negs. (See the hint on the page)
If you haven’t used these holders they are like using a great quality lens as opposed to a “normal” quality lens.
Epson film holders are like toys compared to Fishers’ holders and I highly recommend them.
Jules
(PS) Doug is a very nice fellow and a pleasure to do business with. I believe he uses a Mamiya 645 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|