Digital BW, The Print

Hi all.  A while back I posted a question about using a fluid-mount 
film holder with the Nikon 8000/9000 scanner but got no replies.  
Doesn't anyone on this forum use Kami (i.e."lighter fluid") to mount 
their film for scanning?  I've heard that it helps a lot with dust, 
scratches and Newton rings in comparison to the Nikon medium format 
glass holder.  I do not experience these problems to a significant 
degree but I was wondering if there are any other benefits to fluid 
mounting in comparison to glass-only (e.g. sharpnes, resolution, 
tone, etc?).  If so, are any additional benefits significant/notable 
enough to warrant the $500 pricetag for such holder kit.  The only 
source I know of is Aztek.  Does anyone know of any other (i.e. less 
expensive) sources?
Thanks, Peter.

I believe Ernst Dinkle, who occassional contributes to this list 
also makes one, though I don't know his price. He also hangs out on 
the wide-format forum. I rather expected him to speak up, but maybe 
he was preoccupied?

Steven Karafyllakis

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "peterzakos" 
<peterzakos@y...> wrote:
> 
> Hi all.  A while back I posted a question about using a fluid-
mount 
> film holder with the Nikon 8000/9000 scanner but got no replies.  
> Doesn't anyone on this forum use Kami (i.e."lighter fluid") to 
mount 
> their film for scanning?  I've heard that it helps a lot with 
dust, 
> scratches and Newton rings in comparison to the Nikon medium 
format 
> glass holder.  I do not experience these problems to a significant 
> degree but I was wondering if there are any other benefits to 
fluid 
> mounting in comparison to glass-only (e.g. sharpnes, resolution, 
> tone, etc?).  If so, are any additional benefits 
significant/notable 
> enough to warrant the $500 pricetag for such holder kit.  The only 
> source I know of is Aztek.  Does anyone know of any other (i.e. 
less 
> expensive) sources?
> Thanks, Peter.

Hi Peter,

First off you should check out the archives in the Yahoo Group 
Coolscan8000-9000, where there has been a great deal of discussion about 
the various holders for these scanners.  Also awhile back there was an 
extended thread on the subject on the ScanHi-End group.  

I have an 8000 and the medium-format film holder and Kami from Aztek.  It 
works quite nicely.  Ernst made a few of these but my understanding is that 
he isn't offering them anymore.  You can ask him on the Coolscan group, 
where he is a regular.  

The main advantage of the Aztek holder and Kami is the ability to hold the film 
very flat.  The Nikon scanners have a very narrow depth of focus, which 
makes the regular glassless holder very difficult to use for a lot of 
transparencies and negatives.  The glass holders from Nikon give Newton 
Rings on many scans, which is avoided by using Kami (which is definitely NOT 
lighter fluid).  Some folks make other claims on image quality for this holder, 
but I haven't noticed a difference (haven't done the necessary direct 
comparisons either).  My tranparencies aren't scratched, so not an issue.  
Dust can be as much a problem as before if care isn't taken to.  Price is 
definitely not friendly.  Cheers,

Tom Andrews
http://www.wildlandart.com

> 
> Hi all.  A while back I posted a question about using a fluid-mount 
> film holder with the Nikon 8000/9000 scanner but got no replies.  
> Doesn't anyone on this forum use Kami (i.e."lighter fluid") to mount 
> their film for scanning?  I've heard that it helps a lot with dust, 
> scratches and Newton rings in comparison to the Nikon medium format 
> glass holder.  I do not experience these problems to a significant 
> degree but I was wondering if there are any other benefits to fluid 
> mounting in comparison to glass-only (e.g. sharpnes, resolution, 
> tone, etc?).  If so, are any additional benefits significant/notable 
> enough to warrant the $500 pricetag for such holder kit.  The only 
> source I know of is Aztek.  Does anyone know of any other (i.e. less 
> expensive) sources?
> Thanks, Peter.

I've used the Kami fluid on a friend's flat-bed scanner for MF film
and found it to be quite fussy (removing bubbles between the film and
the glass and the cover sheet) and that the fluid left a hazy film
that did not wash off easily, thus interfering with dry scanning
(likewise for the film?). Further, the fluid is pretty volatile, so
that it could be seen to be shrinking in from the edges as I was
getting ready to run the scan.

I would rather spend the time cleaning up a bit of dust and very minor
scratches than take all that trouble for my images, but, then I'm not
plagued with old dirty, dusty, film.

Frank

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "peterzakos"
<peterzakos@y...> wrote:

> 
> Hi all.  A while back I posted a question about using a fluid-mount 
> film holder with the Nikon 8000/9000 scanner but got no replies.  
> Doesn't anyone on this forum use Kami (i.e."lighter fluid") to mount 
> their film for scanning?  I've heard that it helps a lot with dust, 
> scratches and Newton rings in comparison to the Nikon medium format 
> glass holder.  I do not experience these problems to a significant 
> degree but I was wondering if there are any other benefits to fluid 
> mounting in comparison to glass-only (e.g. sharpnes, resolution, 
> tone, etc?).  If so, are any additional benefits significant/notable 
> enough to warrant the $500 pricetag for such holder kit.  The only 
> source I know of is Aztek.  Does anyone know of any other (i.e. less 
> expensive) sources?
> Thanks, Peter.

njfranknj wrote:
> 
> I've used the Kami fluid on a friend's flat-bed scanner for MF film
> and found it to be quite fussy (removing bubbles between the film and
> the glass and the cover sheet) and that the fluid left a hazy film
> that did not wash off easily, thus interfering with dry scanning
> (likewise for the film?). Further, the fluid is pretty volatile, so
> that it could be seen to be shrinking in from the edges as I was
> getting ready to run the scan.

One issue here, is that the "glass" in a flatbed is not neccisarily glass,
but could be some kind of plastic, which could be affected by the fluid.

> I would rather spend the time cleaning up a bit of dust and very minor
> scratches than take all that trouble for my images, but, then I'm not
> plagued with old dirty, dusty, film.

Really dirty and dusty film, should probably be given a good water wash, 
a dip in some photo-flo (or similar wash aid) and letting it hang to 
dry, just like new film.  Then keep the film in a good quality negative 
sleeve.  You could scan it wet, if your in a hurry, but scanners contain 
electrical components, and water + electricity are not alwaya a good 
combination.

Steven Karafyllakis wrote:
> 
> I believe Ernst Dinkle, who occassional contributes to this list 
> also makes one, though I don't know his price. He also hangs out on 
> the wide-format forum. I rather expected him to speak up, but maybe 
> he was preoccupied?
> 
> Steven Karafyllakis

Let's say off-line as the router needed a firmware upgrade to 
communicate with the new cable modem.

Like mentioned in another message I made the first wet mount 
carriers for the Nikon 8000 but never intended to make it a real 
business of selling them.  I really wonder how many scanner users 
actually use wet mounting while it has many advantages. Both for 
Nikons and Epsons.

Ernst

njfranknj wrote:

> 
> I've used the Kami fluid on a friend's flat-bed scanner for MF film
> and found it to be quite fussy (removing bubbles between the film and
> the glass and the cover sheet) and that the fluid left a hazy film
> that did not wash off easily, thus interfering with dry scanning
> (likewise for the film?). Further, the fluid is pretty volatile, so
> that it could be seen to be shrinking in from the edges as I was
> getting ready to run the scan.
> 
> I would rather spend the time cleaning up a bit of dust and very minor
> scratches than take all that trouble for my images, but, then I'm not
> plagued with old dirty, dusty, film.
> 
> Frank

I'm advocating the use of an extra layer of transparent PET over 
the film that at least extends an inch over the film size on all 
sides. Between the PET and the glass the fluid is inserted with a 
pipet. The capillary force of the larger sheet flattens the 
sandwich much better than just bringing fluid between film and 
glass.  Putting another layer of PET on top and using a 
polyethylene marking film squeegee removes all the air bells, if 
not the second attempt will. That layer of PET film will scratch 
but will be removed before the scan, it can be used more often 
like the PET layer of the sandwich itself. It's the Kami 2001 
that should be used. I prefer "lighter" fluid but I can't 
recommend that for obvious reasons.

Whether the film is well preserved or badly archived wet mounting 
improves the scan quality usually. Mounting on flatbed glass 
doesn't always provide the best focus, many scanners have fixed 
focus on the film height in the film carriers that are laid on 
top of the glass, can be 1 mm above the glass but even that isn't 
sure due to quality control. When a scanner has automatic 
focusing like the Agfa Horizon Plus and several other scanners 
have then the glass bed is alright.

Ernst