Mamiya RB67 (Pro?) - Shooting for scans - best practise?

[EdinburghGary]

Hi Guys,

Been a while since I last posted.  I recently purchased a nice looking Mamiya RB67 kit.  Body & lenses, 50mm, 90mm, 180mm (all C), 3 backs (2 pro, 1 non pro), a polaroid back, and a metering hood.  Having started photography 18 months ago, and shooting only digital until now, this is a steep learning curve for me.  I have experimented with the polaroids, and am fairly confident based on the limited feedback they give, that I am getting the exposures more or less correct.

Yesterday I got my first 3 rolls of Velvia 50 back.  Not scanned or printed, just the slides.  On order I have an Epson v750 scanner - should be here by the weekend.

Now, my question!  I have read on various forums that obviously, a dedicated or drum scanner would be the best bet for getting my slides digitally captured.  The trouble is, spending several thousand GBP on a scanner is not something I can justify at the moment, so I settled on the best I could within a reasonable budget.  The v750 set me back £450 including delivery, all brand new.

Bearing in mind that I am fairly new to all this, and I have never even seen slide film before, let alone, scanned it, can you recommend to me the best practices for ensuring a decent digital version of my slide?  Am I right in thinking, just because a slide looks good to my eyes, that the scanner might see something completely different - and I may in actual fact have "unworkable" slides in terms of transferring them to digital?  The reason I am asking such a bizarre question, I felt I was able to expose my images a little easier than I had imagined.  I thought I would fail completely but the slides look wonderful, and I am surprised.

I am looking for the catch, and my impatience is getting the better of me.  Should have the scanner by friday.  In the mean time, any hints or tips on both the camera and the scanner, greatly appreciated.

Gary.

[ChrisS]

Not a helpful reply - but where did you get a V750 for £450? That's a better price than I've found.

[sojournerphoto]

Hi Guys,

Been a while since I last posted.  I recently purchased a nice looking Mamiya RB67 kit.  Body & lenses, 50mm, 90mm, 180mm (all C), 3 backs (2 pro, 1 non pro), a polaroid back, and a metering hood.  Having started photography 18 months ago, and shooting only digital until now, this is a steep learning curve for me.  I have experimented with the polaroids, and am fairly confident based on the limited feedback they give, that I am getting the exposures more or less correct.

Yesterday I got my first 3 rolls of Velvia 50 back.  Not scanned or printed, just the slides.  On order I have an Epson v750 scanner - should be here by the weekend.

Now, my question!  I have read on various forums that obviously, a dedicated or drum scanner would be the best bet for getting my slides digitally captured.  The trouble is, spending several thousand GBP on a scanner is not something I can justify at the moment, so I settled on the best I could within a reasonable budget.  The v750 set me back £450 including delivery, all brand new.

Bearing in mind that I am fairly new to all this, and I have never even seen slide film before, let alone, scanned it, can you recommend to me the best practices for ensuring a decent digital version of my slide?  Am I right in thinking, just because a slide looks good to my eyes, that the scanner might see something completely different - and I may in actual fact have "unworkable" slides in terms of transferring them to digital?  The reason I am asking such a bizarre question, I felt I was able to expose my images a little easier than I had imagined.  I thought I would fail completely but the slides look wonderful, and I am surprised.

I am looking for the catch, and my impatience is getting the better of me.  Should have the scanner by friday.  In the mean time, any hints or tips on both the camera and the scanner, greatly appreciated.

Gary.

Hi Gary,

I'm sure that you'll enjoy it as you get up to speed. I'm also not surprised that you exposed the film correctly - it's been around a long time and works well these days:)

For scanning the current wisdom seems to be that the V750 is the best of the non film scanner solutions, and with the right holders can do a good job with medium format. The next step up - and it's a big one - is the Nikon 9000 which will pull significantly more out of the trannies or negs. Again there are advantages in finding the best holders. A lot of people use glass holders with both of these scanners, either with or without wet mounting. One of the weaknesses of the epson compared with the Nikon is that it isn;t as good at extracting detail from the shadows and so you may get better results scanning negative material rather than transparency (the contrast range is lower and the blacks not as dark) - it's certainly worth experimenting. For colour neg I like Kodak's Portra 160 films NC and VC (Normal and vivid colour) and the recently available in medium format ektar 100, which is a high saturation film with very fine grain and good sharpness.

The other downside of the epson is that it's maximum real scan resolution is about 2400dpi compared with the Nikon whisch achievs almost the full 4000.

FWIW I scan 355mm on a Nikon 5000 and haven't done any MF yet - purely because of the cost of a Nikon 9000. I keep being tempted to try an epson, but I know that would lead directly to a Nikon on the credit card...

Look forward to seeing some of your results.

Mike

[MarkL]

To avoid paying big money for scanners that do justice to your slides I would look at sending the scanning out as I do unless you shoot loads and print huge amounts of slides very large. I use a flatbed to 'proof' and then send out for high quality scans.

Best value I have found are:

R&K photographic use a coolscan 9000 and change £4 a scan (http://www.randkphotographic.co.uk/scanning2.htm)

BlueSkyImages use an imacon and change £10 for max res and less for A3 size (http://www.blueskyimages.co.uk)

The imacon scans are better than the 9000. I've never had a drum scan done but I would imagine you need to be printing very big to see the difference vs. imacon and deep pockets at £60 a scan!

BTW others will disagree, but velvia is not the best choice for scanning imo. It is very contrasty and scanners can struggle to get the most of out it, I shoot provia which has finer grain, has wider latitude and is easier for scanners. You can always boost the red stauration in post.

[EdinburghGary]

Not a helpful reply - but where did you get a V750 for £450? That's a better price than I've found.

Very sorry for the delay in a reply.  Pixmania, using the £9 off voucher, and standard delivery.  I will try and find EXACT details, as they list it about 40 times with different prices.

Gary.

[EdinburghGary]

Hi Gary,

I'm sure that you'll enjoy it as you get up to speed. I'm also not surprised that you exposed the film correctly - it's been around a long time and works well these days:)

For scanning the current wisdom seems to be that the V750 is the best of the non film scanner solutions, and with the right holders can do a good job with medium format. The next step up - and it's a big one - is the Nikon 9000 which will pull significantly more out of the trannies or negs. Again there are advantages in finding the best holders. A lot of people use glass holders with both of these scanners, either with or without wet mounting. One of the weaknesses of the epson compared with the Nikon is that it isn;t as good at extracting detail from the shadows and so you may get better results scanning negative material rather than transparency (the contrast range is lower and the blacks not as dark) - it's certainly worth experimenting. For colour neg I like Kodak's Portra 160 films NC and VC (Normal and vivid colour) and the recently available in medium format ektar 100, which is a high saturation film with very fine grain and good sharpness.

The other downside of the epson is that it's maximum real scan resolution is about 2400dpi compared with the Nikon whisch achievs almost the full 4000.

FWIW I scan 355mm on a Nikon 5000 and haven't done any MF yet - purely because of the cost of a Nikon 9000. I keep being tempted to try an epson, but I know that would lead directly to a Nikon on the credit card...

Look forward to seeing some of your results.

Mike

Thanks Mike,

I will hopefully have the scanner tomorrow and will get my "noob" attempts up here .  I must confess, I usually plump for the best I can afford, and if this does not perform as good as I hope, I will trade it up.

Gary.

[EdinburghGary]

To avoid paying big money for scanners that do justice to your slides I would look at sending the scanning out as I do unless you shoot loads and print huge amounts of slides very large. I use a flatbed to 'proof' and then send out for high quality scans.

Best value I have found are:

R&K photographic use a coolscan 9000 and change £4 a scan (http://www.randkphotographic.co.uk/scanning2.htm)

BlueSkyImages use an imacon and change £10 for max res and less for A3 size (http://www.blueskyimages.co.uk)

The imacon scans are better than the 9000. I've never had a drum scan done but I would imagine you need to be printing very big to see the difference vs. imacon and deep pockets at £60 a scan!

BTW others will disagree, but velvia is not the best choice for scanning imo. It is very contrasty and scanners can struggle to get the most of out it, I shoot provia which has finer grain, has wider latitude and is easier for scanners. You can always boost the red stauration in post.

Thanks Mark,

The scanner you mention is in use at my local photo lab, the imacon.  With regards to Velvia, I have another 4 rolls or so - as soon as I am done, I will experiment with alternatives.  I am totally new to film, and I enjoy jumping in at the deep end   I hope I have not wasted my efforts so far!

Will update the thread when I get the scanner, and some shots sorted.

Gary.