Scanning 4x4cm negs

[Oldfox]

I need to scan 800 4x4cm (127 film) b&w negs. I have searched "the whole Internet" and got very little info.

Has anyone any suggestions how to do that? Also outside service hints are welcome.

/fox

[jaapb]

The "whole internet" nor this forum will come up with a suitable answer if you don't specify how you want your scanning to be done and your equipment available. Let me try to fill in your blanks and maybe you can filter out something that fits your bill.
Filmscanning can be done with dedicated filmscanners and flatbeds. Good filmscanners are the Nikon ls-9000 and the (slow) Minolta dimage multiscan pro (discontinued). A good flatbed is the Epson 750V
Large format negs like your 4x4's need glasholders to keep the film flat for best sharpness.

I use Vuescan scanner software for driving my flatbed and filmscanner, one license and interface for multiple scanners and works on the newest 64 bits Windows and Mac OS.
Output your files as 16bit greyscale tiffs (vuescan can invert the neg into a positive and fits in a colormanaged workflow) hires (2400dpi minimum) so the files can handle lots of postprocessing properly. I denoise the files with Topaz denoise and capture sharpen them with Photokit sharpener 2.
You need to get rid of dust and specks in the files by postprocessing because hardware infrared removal of dust and specks from the files (Digital ICE) doesn't work on B&W silver halide film, unless your film is Ilford XP2.
In general scanning and postprocessing is tedious work and unless you want to invest a serious amount of time you may want to consider to outsource the scanning and maybe even the postprocessing. Have a look at www.scancafe.com.
Hope this helps.

Jaap

[Oldfox]

Thx for reply.

The software is no problem (I use Vuescan also), the problem is in the hardware. I have Nikon Coolscan V Ed. As far as I know it can handle only 35mm film and 35mm slides (I have the MA-21 Slide Mounter Adapter). But I haven't figured out how to scan my 4x4's with that. And the same goes for Nikon Coolscan 5000.

As for flatbed scanners, all I have checked have 35 mm or 6x6cm adapters, but no 4x4cm adapter.

And the number of negs is quite large, 800. So maybe there is a service somewhere out there that I am not aware of. Your suggestion of Scancafe is what I was hoping for as an answer and it looks promising. I will have a closer look at that.

/fox

[langier]

Your 5000 will not scan anything wider than 24mm. You would need to cut the film by hand to do this. Don't cut the film down...

Best bet on the cheap are the Epson scanners starting at just a couple of hundred bucks  (web quality) for their basic scanners. However, I'd go with an Epson 700/750 at the low end, around $500-$750. You could do several scans at one time and this would be fine for archiving and most prints.

The Nikon 8000/9000 with the glass holder would be somewhat better but at $2500+.

Top end for desktop scanners is the Imacon Flextight scanners at $10,000-$20,000.

You could go to a drum scanner, but then you are in the stratosphere for cost.

Another way is to farm them out to a place like WCI for custom scans starting at $25 each unless they are having a sale. You could contact your local professional photo lab and ask them if they scan at least 6x6 film...

Knowing what the end product will determine what will be your choice of scanner or service, not just the desire to scan them in. Your workflow goal should be to do the work once with a plan in mind so you don't simply scan them in a low-res for web get the work done and later need to produce 3x3 foot prints for an exhibit and you've got to redo every image.

[Mark D Segal]

Just to add a couple of insights here:

The Nikon 9000 scanner is very expensive because it is only available on the resale market at scarcity prices. If you are prepared to pay in the range of 2700~3000 dollars, and the seller provides a good unit, it's top-of-line for this kind of work. More realistically, the Epson V-750 is a current model much more reasonably priced in the 700~800 range, and is a versatile scanner. It is a flatbed, which is normally not the best recommendation for film scanning, but this model does pretty well with medium format negatives. You DO NOT need glass carriers to solve lack of flatness, and in fact I would discourage their use for this purpose. They are another source of dirt and they can (but not necessarily) produce artifacts in the scan. Epson does not provide them. For this scanner model, Epson does provide a glass bed which can be used for wet-mounting the film. I have found that using film cleaner as the mounting medium really works well, does no damage to the film and simply evaporates. It holds the film flat for the short time needed to do the scanning.

As for scanning software, you have several choices:

Epson Scan
Vuescan
SilverFast

If all you will be doing is scanning these B&W negatives in to a positive grayscale TIFF, you may wish to see what EpsonScan does for you before buying anything. It comes bundled with the scanner.

[vandevanterSH]

"The Nikon 9000 scanner is very expensive because it is only available on the resale market at scarcity prices. If you are prepared to pay in the range of 2700~3000 dollars, and the seller provides a good unit, it's top-of-line for this kind of work. More realistically, the Epson V-750 is a current model much more reasonably priced in the 700~800 range, and is a versatile scanner."
*******
As a hobbyist with both an Epson V-750 and a Nikon 9000, the difference in scan quality with MF negs isn't dramatic.  I don't think that I would have high "batting average" in identifying the scanner in a "blinded" test.

Steve

[Mark D Segal]

"The Nikon 9000 scanner is very expensive because it is only available on the resale market at scarcity prices. If you are prepared to pay in the range of 2700~3000 dollars, and the seller provides a good unit, it's top-of-line for this kind of work. More realistically, the Epson V-750 is a current model much more reasonably priced in the 700~800 range, and is a versatile scanner."
*******
As a hobbyist with both an Epson V-750 and a Nikon 9000, the difference in scan quality with MF negs isn't dramatic.  I don't think that I would have high "batting average" in identifying the scanner in a "blinded" test.

Steve

That is really good to hear! I've also been pleased to see what the Epson V750 can do with MF negs, but haven't had the opportunity to make a direct comparison with a Nikon 9000.

[jaapb]

Mark, Steve,

Here is a review of the Epson V-750, also compared to the Nikon LS-9000. Bottom line, not too much difference in normal viewing conditions although the Nikon holds better shadow detail and is a bit sharper when examined more closely.

www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson V750/page_1.htm

[vandevanterSH]

Mark, Steve,

Here is a review of the Epson V-750, also compared to the Nikon LS-9000. Bottom line, not too much difference in normal viewing conditions although the Nikon holds better shadow detail and is a bit sharper when examined more closely.

www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson V750/page_1.htm

I agree but for me the major difference is ease of use of the Nikon and the Epson flat bed is a bit of a dust magnet.  That said, the Nikons seem to be selling for $2-3k used and $4k+ new.  I bought mine new from a Nikon dealer for list just before the official announcement in Japan that they were D/C'd.  IMO, with the current pricing of 9000s and the marginal improvement compared to the 700/750, get the Epson.  If much better quality is needed then triage with the Epson and send the very few "keepers" out for pro scans.  If price isn't an issue then get an Imacon/Hasselblad.

Steve

[Rhossydd]

Have a look at www.scancafe.com.

Have you used this service yourself ? If so, what's it like ?

TIA

Paul

[jaapb]

Paul,

I haven't tried them nor any other scanning service. Its the mindset of handing your originals over and having them sent all over the world to have them scanned. I prefer DIY and be in control of the results myself.
Scancafe however, if you google on scancafe review, appear to do a good job.

Regards,

Jaap

[Mark D Segal]

Have you used this service yourself ? If so, what's it like ?

TIA

Paul

I have had an opportunity to evaluate the results of Scancafe's work, comparing the original media with their output and with what I could produce in my Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED using SilverFast AI6 Studio, - not a slouchy scanner or software suite. Their work is pretty good. But if you want 16-bit per channel TIFFs you need to pay them more than their base price, and if you want any corrective work done, you need to pay yet more again. The basic service, however, produces what I would consider to be good value for money. I understand they do all the work in India and they assure a secure and reliable receipt and delivery system whereby everything is tracked so customers' work does not normally get lost. Personally, I still prefer to do my own scanning, but not everyone can practically do this - for example, there are many folks with huge archives of family memories on film they wish to digitize and simply don't have the time to do it, nor do they intend to produce large format fine-art photographs from these images. For these kind of conditions, scanning services such as this one make a lot of sense.

[BradSmith]

I sent them a couple hundred old slides.  They scanned them, per my instructions, as 8 bit jpgs, and posted the images online for me to review.  I could choose up to 20% of them to not have scanned or pay for.  They were a little too dark, so I contacted their customer service and pointed out a couple that were obviously too dark.   Two days later, I got an email with new versions to look at.   I told them that these two were much better.  They said they'd process the order.

About two weeks later, I got all my slides back along with 2 dvds.   The first was, I believe, the original too dark scans.   The second were the same images, but brighter or with more exposure than the other set.  No extra charge for this.  I brought them into Lightroom, and made some further adjustments/cropped, etc.  I've decided to do the same with the remaining 45+ carousels.   I'll then use those digital images to make a couple Blurb books to document all those years for family members.  The images that are good enough for printing, I'll rescan on my Konica-Minolta scanner to try to sqeeze out everything I can. 

It's probably not a good choice if your goal is to have them give you "fine art" level scans.  But for the cost, and if you have lots, and lots, and lots of slides or negatives that you want to be digitized, I think it is a very good service.

Brad

[Rhossydd]

I sent them a couple hundred old slides.  ....... I think it is a very good service

Thank's for the report Brad. It's always nice to read of real customer's experiences. I may well give them a go for some older material that I'd like passable scans of, but haven't the time to do properly here.

Paul

[RFPhotography]

As for flatbed scanners, all I have checked have 35 mm or 6x6cm adapters, but no 4x4cm adapter.



/fox

For your film, the fluid mount option for the V750 would allow you to scan the film without a holder.  I have it, I've used it, it can be fussy, it works well.

[Oldfox]

That makes V750 more desirable. The price difference between V700 and V750 is however quite big, about 250 USD.

The area of one image in 4x4 negative is about 46x46mm. Can you tell how many images can be scanned with one scan with the fluid mount?

/fox

[RFPhotography]

The glass mount that comes with the V750 is 9 3/4" x 7 1/4" in useable surface or 243 x 181 mm.  At 46mm square that's 15 on the plate at a time. 

[Oldfox]

I found this with Google today. It is from photo.net. This seems to be a simple solution, though it means a little extra work. Why did I not figure it myself ;-)

>Ron Gratz , Jan 03, 2006; 09:59 a.m.

>I ran into the same problem trying to scan in 127 negatives. They are too large for the 35mm holder and too small for the 120 holder I have for my scanner. To solve the problem I took an unexposed sheet of 5x7 sheet film and cut it to the width of 120 film (2.24") then cut a window in the sheet film that is is very slightly smaller than the 127 negative. I then use some tape to hold  the 127 negative in the window and the use the 120 holder. The scan works perfectly.

>If you are using 110 film and have a 35mm holder you should be able to do the same thing using an unexposed strip of 35mm film.

>Ron Gratz

[Oldfox]

Have a look at www.scancafe.com.

I asked them (by email) and got an answer that they scan 4x4 negs, but only color negatives.

I replied that that's ok for me. My b&w negs can be scanned as color negs. They did not reply. Maybe they have customers more than they can handle...

[Mark D Segal]

I found this with Google today. It is from photo.net. This seems to be a simple solution, though it means a little extra work. Why did I not figure it myself ;-)

>Ron Gratz , Jan 03, 2006; 09:59 a.m.

>I ran into the same problem trying to scan in 127 negatives. They are too large for the 35mm holder and too small for the 120 holder I have for my scanner. To solve the problem I took an unexposed sheet of 5x7 sheet film and cut it to the width of 120 film (2.24") then cut a window in the sheet film that is is very slightly smaller than the 127 negative. I then use some tape to hold  the 127 negative in the window and the use the 120 holder. The scan works perfectly.

>If you are using 110 film and have a 35mm holder you should be able to do the same thing using an unexposed strip of 35mm film.

>Ron Gratz

Needless to say I have no idea what your situation is, and for many people it's understandable that an extra 250 dollars is a considerable decision point which must be respected; but there are many others who have the financial flexibility along with an inveterate distaste for investing it in higher-end equipment when "less will do"; however, depending on personal circumstances, time also has value in alternative uses. If it does, it becomes material to consider all the extra time spent very carefully taping and untaping these films into the film frame, put even a modest monetary value onto that time and one discovers the extra expenditure gets paid off very quickly, with icing on the cake that the 750 has additional  features making it a somewhat better scanner. It's very easy to use that glass mount assembly in the 750. The film is held flat on the glass long enough to be scanned with a simple application of film cleaner using PEC pads. There is no residue and no additional care needed once the scan is done.