Digital BW, The Print

I have been following with interest the discussion of using a copy 
stand, light tablet, and digital camera to copy negatives instead of 
scanning. I have been using a Nikon 9000 to scan black and white 35mm 
and 120 negatives. If this alternative works as well, I would strongly 
consider selling my scanner. Could someone who is doing this please 
describe it in greater detail? For example, what length camera lens do 
you use? Do you place a piece of glass on top of the negative? Anything 
else one needs to know about how to do it? Also, it would be great if 
someone would post a copy of a negative copied using this method. Thanks 
so much. Paula Berg

If you already have a scanner then use that as no camera can match the
resolution.

On 22 July 2012 15:10, Paula Berg <Berg@...> wrote:

> I have been following with interest the discussion of using a copy
> stand, light tablet, and digital camera to copy negatives instead of
> scanning. I have been using a Nikon 9000 to scan black and white 35mm
> and 120 negatives. If this alternative works as well, I would strongly
> consider selling my scanner. Could someone who is doing this please
> describe it in greater detail? For example, what length camera lens do
> you use? Do you place a piece of glass on top of the negative? Anything
> else one needs to know about how to do it? Also, it would be great if
> someone would post a copy of a negative copied using this method. Thanks
> so much. Paula Berg
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
> they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner
> and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files
> section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND
> �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO
> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE
>  �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN
> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR
> THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii)
> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii)
> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO
> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO
> GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Peter Krogh has a pdf that explains it pretty clearly.

http://www.thedambook.com/downloads/Camera_Scanning_Krogh.pdf

I use a Beseler Slide duplicator and a Canon 1DMII with a macro lens.  It's
easy and fast but I still get better results with my Nikon LS5000.

Tina

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Paula Berg <Berg@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I have been following with interest the discussion of using a copy
> stand, light tablet, and digital camera to copy negatives instead of
> scanning. I have been using a Nikon 9000 to scan black and white 35mm
> and 120 negatives. If this alternative works as well, I would strongly
> consider selling my scanner. Could someone who is doing this please
> describe it in greater detail? For example, what length camera lens do
> you use? Do you place a piece of glass on top of the negative? Anything
> else one needs to know about how to do it? Also, it would be great if
> someone would post a copy of a negative copied using this method. Thanks
> so much. Paula Berg
>
>  
>



-- 
Tina Manley, ASMP
www.tinamanley.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On 23/07/2012 12:10 AM, Paula Berg wrote:
> I have been following with interest the discussion of using a copy
> stand, light tablet, and digital camera to copy negatives instead of
> scanning. I have been using a Nikon 9000 to scan black and white 35mm
> and 120 negatives. If this alternative works as well, I would strongly
> consider selling my scanner. Could someone who is doing this please
> describe it in greater detail? For example, what length camera lens do
> you use? Do you place a piece of glass on top of the negative? Anything
> else one needs to know about how to do it? Also, it would be great if
> someone would post a copy of a negative copied using this method. Thanks
> so much. Paula Berg

Paula, you can download a sample file from Peter Krogh's DAM Forum, 
here: http://thedambook.com/smf/index.php?topic=1832.0

Elsewhere on that forum you will find lots of practical information and 
advice.

Peter Marquis-Kyle

You might want to look at these two articles by Ctein on The Online Photographer (TOP):

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/01/scan-film-with-camera-1.html

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/01/how-to-scan-film-2.html

David

Plustek has just announced a new high end scanner that is intended as a replacement for the Nikon 9000ED. 

The specifications look promising.

www.plustek.com/usa/products/opticfilm-series/opticfilm-120/introduction.html

I'm not sure if this link will come through with this email, but if it doesn't just visit the Plustek website for more info.

I currently own a 9000ED, but like all of us I dread the day that it stops working. This may be a viable alternative,
unless you can afford some a lot more sophisticated. Pricing seems to be quite reasonable, estimated to be around
$2000-3000.


Plustek OpticFilm 120


Image Sensor							CCD
Light Source								LED
Hardware Resolution	Maximum Input：		10600 dpi
Maximum Output：						5300 dpi
Scan Modes	Color: 						48-bit input, 24/48-bit output 
Grayscale: 								16-bit input, 8/16-bit output
Dynamic Range							4.8
Infrared	Built-in
Scanning Area (W x L)					60 mm x 120 mm
IT8 Target								Included for color accuracy
Power Supply							24 Vdc / 0.75 A
Interface									USB 2.0
Net Weight								Approx. 5.7 Kgs
Dimensions (W x D x H)					210 x 374 x 189 mm


OS	Windows XP / Vista / 7 / 8
Intel-based Mac OS X 10.5 / 10.6 / 10.7 / 10.8
Hardware Requirements	Windows PC
2 GHz Processor or faster
2 GB RAM main memory (4 GB RAM recommended)
10 GB free space on hard disk drive
DVD drive or internet connection

Mac 
2 GHz Processor or faster (INTEL based processor, NO PowerPC )
2 GB RAM main memory (4 GB RAM recommended)
10 GB free space on hard disk drive
DVD drive or internet connection

Recently the ICP built a rig to use a DSLR to scan the negatives found in the Mexican Suitcase.

Here is a link to the gadget they came up with.


www.museum.icp.org/mexican_suitcase/conservation.html


and the instruction manual:

www.museum.icp.org/mexican_suitcase/PFD2.pdf


Personally I was surprised that they went this route, instead of using a drum scanner or a Imacon/Hasselblad
scanner. I'm very curious what their reasoning was behind this decision.


Cheers

Feli

On Jul 22, 2012, at 9:00 AM, Feli wrote:

> Personally I was surprised that they went this route, instead of using a drum scanner or a Imacon/Hasselblad
> scanner. I'm very curious what their reasoning was behind this decision.



i just reread the article and answered this question for myself. They used this device to scan the uncut rolls of
film, which would have not fit in their 9000ED. The cut negatives were scanned with the Nikon 9000ED.


Feli


______________________________________________________________
feli2@...		     		2 + 2 = 4		  		 www.elanphotos.com






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From: "Derek Clarke
> If you already have a scanner then use that as no camera can match the
> resolution.

What scanner(s) are you talking about? My camera has 5000dpi resolution 
(D800E); as good as my old Nikon 5000 or Minolta 5400.

Bob Frost

That was true a few years ago but not anymore. Constructively it's really 
easy to have a negative opinion of the process.. but one needs to get it to 
where the potential is realistically on a par.. If you use an LS 5000 ED / 
9000 etc as a comparison which are 4000 dpi scanners you need a camera like 
the Canon 5Dmark iii @ 22.3 Mp or greater to gather the same information.. 
In the past I was using a 12 MP D700 / D3 etc rig and could only capture 
about half of what a 4000 dpi scan could.. The rules have now changed quite 
a bit.. The D800e which does not have the usual  low pass filter is 36+ MP 
or 7360 pixels as compared to 5652 or so from the LS 5000.. The line length 
out of a Canon 5d is slightly longer also.. Admittedly, a line array sensor 
may have an advantage in some cases but today we have literally incredible 
software and capture tools at our disposal to use with a DSLR..

None of this will replace a proper drum scan today but when the process is 
optimized I think most would be quite surprised with the quality of the 
results.. Additionally, their is one very good reason to pursue it..... 
simply time.. A conventional scan regardless of what scanner we use 
typically is like watching paint dry to complete .. That's totally ok if 
your only doing a few .. but what if your trying to bring a collection into 
digital.. A DSLR wins hands down.. You can always go back and do a drum scan 
on the images that are appropriate.. but I think most would be very 
surprised at the results you can pull out of a DSLR and LR4 very 
quickly...In my wildest dreams I never figured we'd be able to get a 200mb+ 
16bit file off a 35mm slide in a matter of seconds.. We'd be nuts not to at 
least try and work out a system to make that process work.. Their are so 
many process options to explore.. nothing is really fixed in stone ...it's 
more about our tenacity in making the process meet our expectations.. Those 
that are familiar with scanning know that a scanner input profile's job is 
to characterize how the scanner see's a particular film types emulsion.. I 
think most that are fooling with DSLR / film captures are forgetting how 
important that step is and it's not done... Anyway, the point is  for those 
that take the time to create a quality process, this is really an 
opportunity to have yet another way to move film to digital..

jimbo






  ----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Derek Clarke" <derek_c@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Using Camera/Copy Stand to "Scan" Negatives


> If you already have a scanner then use that as no camera can match the
> resolution.
>
> On 22 July 2012 15:10, Paula Berg <Berg@...> wrote:
>
>> I have been following with interest the discussion of using a copy
>> stand, light tablet, and digital camera to copy negatives instead of
>> scanning. I have been using a Nikon 9000 to scan black and white 35mm
>> and 120 negatives. If this alternative works as well, I would strongly
>> consider selling my scanner. Could someone who is doing this please
>> describe it in greater detail? For example, what length camera lens do
>> you use? Do you place a piece of glass on top of the negative? Anything
>> else one needs to know about how to do it? Also, it would be great if
>> someone would post a copy of a negative copied using this method. Thanks
>> so much. Paula Berg
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources 
>> as
>> they are often being updated.
>>
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
>> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this 
>> same
>> page.
>>
>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>> keep
>> them short.
>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
>> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
>> membership without notice.
>> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
>> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
>> the membership.
>> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
>> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner
>> and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files
>> section:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>>
>> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
>> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
>> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO
>> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
>> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF
>> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE
>>  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN
>> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE 
>> OR
>> THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii)
>> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii)
>> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
>> YAHOO
>> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
>> YAHOO
>> GROUP.
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
> they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
> page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner 
> and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files 
> section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE 
> "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN 
> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE 
> OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) 
> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) 
> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5146 - Release Date: 07/21/12
>

Hey Bob,
If you don't mind my asking .. what roughly is your process / set up.. I'm 
into this pretty deep at this point and while for me the bar is set at a 
drum scan it's a push to obtain realistic quality that's usable and 
speeeeed.  So presently I to am using an 800e / Illimitran.. which 
relistically doesn't matter as their are many other ways to do this that 
will work also..

jimbo
----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Bob Frost" <bobfrost@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Using Camera/Copy Stand to "Scan" Negatives


> From: "Derek Clarke
>> If you already have a scanner then use that as no camera can match the
>> resolution.
>
> What scanner(s) are you talking about? My camera has 5000dpi resolution
> (D800E); as good as my old Nikon 5000 or Minolta 5400.
>
> Bob Frost
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
> they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
> page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner 
> and Moderators. See \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in the Files 
> section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND 
> \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE 
> \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN 
> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE 
> OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) 
> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) 
> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5147 - Release Date: 07/22/12
>

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?84769-Making-a-scanner-with-a-DSLR
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87536-DSLR-Scanner-Light-Sources
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87539-DSLR-Scanner-Negative-Stages
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87537-DSLR-Scanner-Camera-Supports-and-Positioning
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87538-DSLR-Scanner-Lenses
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?88697-DSLR-SCANNER-No-7
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?88812-DSLR-Scanner-Scans-and-Comparisons
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87540-DSLR-Scanner-Stitching-and-Blending-of-Images
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87541-DSLR-SCanner-Cameras-and-Camera-Control-Software
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?87545-DSLR-Scanner-Workflow

Without getting into some esoteric lenses, a good way to do this is to use
a 55 or 60mm macro.  If it auto-focuses, you can use something like
ControlMyNikon (or similar) to capture and adjust fine focus.  At 1:1 film
flatness and proper focus are extremely important.  Anything much above 1:1
would probably require focus stacking (e.g. using something like Zerene
Stacker) for best results. One of our co-conspirators has a Nikon 8000.  He
can get more detailed scans with his 55mm Nikkor lens.

Another option would be to use a Rodagon 75mm D optimized for 1:1.  There's
also a Rodagon D optimized for 1:2 or 2:1 (if reversed.)

Going above that, using a Mitutoyo M Plan APO 2x objective on a 135mm tube
lens (an old manual focus lens such as a 135mm Nikkor work great for this)
will give a little more  than 1x magnification, and the quality will be
outstanding.  The effective aperture would be about F10.

Probably the ultimate at 1:1 (or there abouts) is a printing Nikkor.  See:
http://coinimaging.com/printing-nikkor_105.html

If you're willing to take more slices, then you could go to one of the
higher magnification microscope objectives, such as a Mitutoyo 5x or a 4x
Nikon, but you will need to focus stack, which adds a lot of added work.

Focus, film flatness, light source evenness, are all extremely important.
If you use a continuous source, the Canons have a special EFCS low
vibration shutter mode in live view that really helps.  I mainly scan BW.
I use a Nikon and a flash-based source.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From: "jimbo
> If you don't mind my asking .. what roughly is your process / set up..

Well, over the last year I played about a lot trying different cameras and 
setups, but now I have settled on a D800E with a 60mm MicroNikkor. On the 
front of that I put a nikon reducing ring, three old filter rings and then a 
copying adapter (modified SRB-griturn compact adapter). This gives me the 
minimum focussing distance for the 60mm lens. It will just autofocus, but I 
use manual with liveview. As a light source I am using a daylight 
fluorescent Bowens TriLite.

As someone else said, the problem is depth of focus. With the copying 
adapter at the closest distance for the 60mm lens, I find I have to use f8 
to get reasonable depth-of-focus with minimum diffraction loss. f5.6 is 
better than f8 for diffraction loss, but f16 is best for depth-of -focus. f8 
is the compromise for me. Most of my old Kodachromes are not so important 
that I need to think of focus stacking!

What I have noticed in the 1000 or so I've done so far, is that the old 
Kodachrome 10 from the early 60s is very grainy, compared to the later 
Kodachrome II and then Kodachrome 25 and 64. I haven't got to the later Fuji 
Provia F, where I expect the quality to be much higher.

I'm using camera autoexposure, and then taking the raw files into Lightroom, 
where the autotone gets most of them into the right ballpark reading for 
tweaking.

Bob Frost

On 07/22/2012 04:17 PM, Derek Clarke wrote:
> If you already have a scanner then use that as no camera can match the
> resolution.
>

For 35mm slides etc I think the high end DSLR solutions will be a good 
replacement, speed us an important factor in scanning and usually there 
are many 35 frames to do. Not so on larger film frames, a Nikon 9000 ED 
can be optimised a lot with wet mounting etc and a true 3800 PPI 
resolution is possible with that scanner. I agree, if you have that 
scanner already, never sell it but when your last MF frame is scanned.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, pi\ufffdzografie, gicl\ufffde
www.pigment-print.com