A new product for digitizing your film.
Old 09-03-2019   #1
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,509
A new product for digitizing your film.

This might be of interest to you film folk. https://www.lewiskemper.com/page/kli...digital-copier
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #2
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
 
ColSebastianMoran's Avatar
 
ColSebastianMoran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,365
Delighted to see innovation happening in this space, but lots of questions looking at the one photo...
- How precise?
- Vibration free?
- Shutter speed, with that light panel, unless it's brighter than typical light panel, you'll be shooting at ~1/4 sec.
__________________
Col. Sebastian Moran, ret. (not really)

In Classifieds Now: Nothing.
Use this link to leave feedback for me.

Named "Best heavy-game shooter in the Eastern Empire." Clubs: Anglo-Indian, Tankerville, and Bagatelle Card Club.
Sony E/FE, Nikon dSLR, and iPhone digital. Misc film.
Birds, portraits, events, family. Mindfulness, reflection, creativity, and stance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #3
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,047
Prices are shown at the bottom of the page, below the images of the scanner set-up.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #4
Tim Gray
Registered User
 
Tim Gray is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,869
I've thought about making a copy stand for negative scanning from 80/20. I'm too lazy though. We use 80/20 all the time at work, but I don't have to cut it and assemble it
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #5
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,509
This is a creation of a Pro photog by the name of Lewis Kemper, he is a contributing editor for Outdoor Photographer as well as other things photographic. Our club had him speak a couple times and as he is a local boy, I felt the need to promote his stuff. I imaging he would be happy to answer any questions. One thing I do know about it, a macro lens is required.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #6
Scottboarding
Registered User
 
Scottboarding is offline
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Arizona
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColSebastianMoran View Post
- Shutter speed, with that light panel, unless it's brighter than typical light panel, you'll be shooting at ~1/4 sec.
I agree with the rest, but I don't understand this one. I use the Slimelight Plano and a Nikon adapter so I'm regularly shooting at 1/4th or slower since the adapter blocks some light. It's never been any issue for me and I can't see how my process would greatly improve shooting at 1/100th of a second.
__________________
Leica M2 - Zeiss 50mm f2 Planar ZM
Nikon FM2n - Nikon F3HP - Voigtlander 40mm f2 SLii - Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #7
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,651
For people who occasionally want to digitize a film and of course already have a good macro lens and do not wish to buy a special device.

One hack I have tried for digitizing film (both negatives and slides) is to use the screen of a computer tablet as the light box / back light source. An app can be found for this (I cannot recall its name). The app just puts out bright light consistently from the LCD and I think from memory its brightness and color can be varied as needed.

I found that one problem with this is that the light from a tablets screen is pixelated and this definitely shows up on the final result when using a good macro lens. So you will also need to mount a semi clear neutrally colored translucent plastic filter on the tablet's screen to diffuse the pixelated light emanating from the screen. I fudged one from a white translucent plastic document sleeve bought for pennies from a stationery store specifically for this purpose. Of course you will also need a tripod which can orient your camera to the tablet - the most convenient way is to orient the camera facing the ground / table with the tablet laying flat.

I have tried it once or twice as an experiment but I have not gone back (yet) as I have been busy with more interesting stuff - but I do intend experimenting more when both need and time available coincide. I still have quite a few old negatives I could scan but have been reluctant to buy kit for this purpose as it is not a high priority for me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #8
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is online now
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,511
My NIB Plustek scanner cost me much less and takes less space than this bunch of planks.
Not to mention need to purchase macro lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #9
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 3,054
That takes up a lot more space then my scanner does
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #10
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,917
Thanks for sharing.

Interesting approach.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #11
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,862
$625?

Lessee.. my copy stand - $150. LED light panel - $20. Digitiliza film holder that also covers pano and 6x9 which his does not - $30.
Total? $200.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #12
Greyscale
Registered User
 
Greyscale's Avatar
 
Greyscale is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Dodge Iowa
Age: 59
Posts: 4,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
For people who occasionally want to digitize a film and of course already have a good macro lens and do not wish to buy a special device.

One hack I have tried for digitizing film (both negatives and slides) is to use the screen of a computer tablet as the light box / back light source. An app can be found for this (I cannot recall its name). The app just puts out bright light consistently from the LCD and I think from memory its brightness and color can be varied as needed.

I found that one problem with this is that the light from a tablets screen is pixelated and this definitely shows up on the final result when using a good macro lens. So you will also need to mount a semi clear neutrally colored translucent plastic filter on the tablet's screen to diffuse the pixelated light emanating from the screen. I fudged one from a white translucent plastic document sleeve bought for pennies from a stationery store specifically for this purpose. Of course you will also need a tripod which can orient your camera to the tablet - the most convenient way is to orient the camera facing the ground / table with the tablet laying flat.

I have tried it once or twice as an experiment but I have not gone back (yet) as I have been busy with more interesting stuff - but I do intend experimenting more when both need and time available coincide. I still have quite a few old negatives I could scan but have been reluctant to buy kit for this purpose as it is not a high priority for me.
The app is called, appropriately enough, Light Table. I have found that raising the negative several millimeters above the tablet alleviate s the pixelation problem, I used my iPad for several months in this manner, but found an LED light panel for about &14 on eBay that provides a brighter source without the pixel problem.
__________________
my flickr

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #13
Greyscale
Registered User
 
Greyscale's Avatar
 
Greyscale is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Dodge Iowa
Age: 59
Posts: 4,622
I like the horizontal concept, but the footprint is much bigger than a vertical setup, too big for my use. Nice if you have the space.
__________________
my flickr

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #14
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,826
Great idea on an old theme.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #15
WJJ3
Registered User
 
WJJ3's Avatar
 
WJJ3 is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hakuba
Posts: 710
I stacked a few hoods on the end of my macro lens and made a magnetized film carrier that clings to it. Holds my film parallel to the sensor near the MFD of my macro lens. Works great and cost me about $30.

__________________
Happy Shooting!
~Will

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #16
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyscale View Post
The app is called, appropriately enough, Light Table. I have found that raising the negative several millimeters above the tablet alleviate s the pixelation problem, I used my iPad for several months in this manner, but found an LED light panel for about &14 on eBay that provides a brighter source without the pixel problem.
Yes Light Table is its name. And it is good to know that raising the negative helps. BTW how did you do that - did you make a carrier of some sort or did you already have a plastic carrier of the sort often sold with flatbed scanners for holding and scanning negatives?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-03-2019   #17
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJJ3 View Post
I stacked a few hoods on the end of my macro lens and made a magnetized film carrier that clings to it. Holds my film parallel to the sensor near the MFD of my macro lens. Works great and cost me about $30.

Excellent! And all for $30!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #18
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,466
They say that if you've got nothing nice to say don't say anything at all...


(my drum scanner takes less space, looks much nicer and was cheaper)
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #19
Ste_S
Registered User
 
Ste_S is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 221
I had to chortle at the pricing
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #20
majid
Fazal Majid
 
majid's Avatar
 
majid is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 611
Sounds like a Nikon PB-6 bellows with PS-6 slide copying attachment. Just without the bellows, convenience or low price.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #21
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
They say that if you've got nothing nice to say don't say anything at all...

(my drum scanner takes less space, looks much nicer and was cheaper)
What drum scanner is that?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #22
Lax Jought
Registered User
 
Lax Jought is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
This might be of interest to you film folk.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #23
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by olifaunt View Post
What drum scanner is that?
Howtek 4500.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #24
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Howtek 4500.
Wow, just curious how that was cheaper than $600?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #25
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 5,511
Priced not to sell.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #26
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,975
I have a table saw and drill and a few basic wood working skills. For a few dollars I can build a setup to do the same thing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #27
WJJ3
Registered User
 
WJJ3's Avatar
 
WJJ3 is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hakuba
Posts: 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Excellent! And all for $30!
Thanks, yeah itís doing the job.
__________________
Happy Shooting!
~Will

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #28
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Silly Valley, California, USA
Posts: 9,184
These copier jigs do seem rather expensive and I worry about stability with the vertical arrangement. My Novoflex copy stand, flat panel light box, and home-made mask/film holder arrangement is cheaper, smaller, and more rigid; probably sets up faster (about 5 minutes). It also allows exposures at about ISO 200 @ f/8 @ 1/50 to 1/100 sec for most negatives, which helps ensure stability.

Nice to see someone building dedicated equipment for this endeavor, regardless.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-04-2019   #29
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
These copier jigs do seem rather expensive and I worry about stability with the vertical arrangement. My Novoflex copy stand, flat panel light box, and home-made mask/film holder arrangement is cheaper, smaller, and more rigid; probably sets up faster (about 5 minutes). It also allows exposures at about ISO 200 @ f/8 @ 1/50 to 1/100 sec for most negatives, which helps ensure stability.

Nice to see someone building dedicated equipment for this endeavor, regardless.

G
Never had any stability issues using my cheapo $150 new copy stand. I copy at iso 64/f11 which is about 1/2 sec. Everything is always pin sharp. I make sure to use the exposure delay mode on my camera so that the shutter fires about 3 secs after I push the button to let things settle down.
When I used a DSLR to scan film, I first had to use the Mirror Up functionality before the shutter delay. Now using mirrorless - no mirror so one less thing to deal with.

I wonder why some company just doesn't provide a film copying bundle so it's a one stop shop for users instead of re-inventing the wheel? In the bundle there would be the copy stand, light pad and a few film holders. Done.
The Digitiliza film holders are very good and the 35mm one allows for 35mm and pano, while the 120 one allows for 6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2019   #30
albireo
Registered User
 
albireo is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
This might be of interest to you film folk. https://www.lewiskemper.com/page/kli...digital-copier
"These days everyone has a digital camera with high resolution and excellent dynamic range."

WRONG. I don't anymore. And many people in my age group don't either (a good modern phone is all we need for digital photography).

I'm quite happy with my Plustek 7500i for 35mm and with my Epson V550 for my medium format scanning, to be quite honest. When you master the hardware and the software, the results can be amazing.

Don't even get me started on the form factor of this 'solution' above. I imagine whoever wrote the blog does not have a wife?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2019   #31
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Never had any stability issues using my cheapo $150 new copy stand. I copy at iso 64/f11 which is about 1/2 sec. Everything is always pin sharp. I make sure to use the exposure delay mode on my camera so that the shutter fires about 3 secs after I push the button to let things settle down.
When I used a DSLR to scan film, I first had to use the Mirror Up functionality before the shutter delay. Now using mirrorless - no mirror so one less thing to deal with.

I wonder why some company just doesn't provide a film copying bundle so it's a one stop shop for users instead of re-inventing the wheel? In the bundle there would be the copy stand, light pad and a few film holders. Done.
The Digitiliza film holders are very good and the 35mm one allows for 35mm and pano, while the 120 one allows for 6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9.
Cue the Chinese:





I haven't got to play with one in real life, but the whole bundle (with light source and film holders) cost around $90.

Looks like these guys aren't aware of the international market yet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2019   #32
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archlich View Post
Cue the Chinese:





I haven't got to play with one in real life, but the whole bundle (with light source and film holders) cost around $90.

Looks like these guys aren't aware of the international market yet.
Hmm, that looks like something the French would have built..
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2019   #33
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,522
I'm using the Nikon ES-2 digitizer with a Micro-Nikkor lens and a Nikon D800. And, honestly, when copying 35mm slides or negatives, I just take the rig outside on a sunny day, set the ISO and WB to automatic, the lens to f/8 and aim for a blank area of the sky. I might have to make minor color adjustments to the slides in Lightroom but the results look great to me and it's a lot less setup and expense than these contraptions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2019   #34
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogman View Post
I'm using the Nikon ES-2 digitizer with a Micro-Nikkor lens and a Nikon D800. And, honestly, when copying 35mm slides or negatives, I just take the rig outside on a sunny day, set the ISO and WB to automatic, the lens to f/8 and aim for a blank area of the sky. I might have to make minor color adjustments to the slides in Lightroom but the results look great to me and it's a lot less setup and expense than these contraptions.
I used to use AWB, but the results were variable as the camera often does not know how to get a WB from the orange film base. While I was pondering why sometimes my scans took more work to correct the colour, I realized just to set WB to sunny.
Then the results were completely consistent, simple and accurate as a baseline was set before conversion with negativelabpro.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2019   #35
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
And it is good to know that raising the negative helps. BTW how did you do that - did you make a carrier of some sort or did you already have a plastic carrier of the sort often sold with flatbed scanners for holding and scanning negatives?
I searched around in the basement and found the remnants of a box of 1/4-20 hex nuts and used four of them underneath the Omega negative holders I use to hold my films. The nuts raise the negative high enough that not only are there no pixels visible, but any specs of dust remaining on the lightpad disappear too (within reason of course).

If I was more organized I'd attach the nuts to the bottom of each of my negative holders; 35mm. 120 and 127, like with contact cement or something.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-08-2019   #36
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,374
Their device looks well made, and easy to use, but it's kinda pricey. I just bought a Nikon ES-2. It screws onto the business end of the 60mm micro lens I already have. The film carrier holds the film flat, and it takes about a second per scan, once you load the film into the holder. It costs all of $139.

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-08-2019   #37
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,374
About the ES-2, continued ...

I previously used a Coolscan 5000, but a problem I had with it was "grain aliasing", that is, the scanner could not make out individual grains, so images has a pronounced grain look, caused by clumps of grains that were not fully resolved.

With this setup, the resolution of the scan is about 6000 dots per inch, which does resolve the grains. The result it a smoother grain even with a grainy film such as HIE. So here is a sample of the output of my setup. Only it's actually a lot bigger - about 45 megapixels.



Here is a 100% crop showing the showing the (barely) resolved grain at full size:

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-08-2019   #38
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,862
yep yep, here is my ES-2 use with a Z7 + 60 2.8G

Full image:


1:1 crop from the end of the sentence:

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-08-2019   #39
Bille
Registered User
 
Bille's Avatar
 
Bille is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Age: 41
Posts: 762
500$+

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Machifit-50...kAAOSwXx9cAO-X
__________________
Your mom!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-08-2019   #40
Takkun
Ian M.
 
Takkun's Avatar
 
Takkun is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sunny South Seattle
Posts: 792
Wow, $500 dollars would buy a lot of T-slot extrusions. That's pricey for what you get.

one of these days I'll show my rig, but it's all made from leftover foam core and matte board from framing. Two sheets of hinged matte board for a film carrier, with masking tape "guide rails" for ease of sliding into place. That's on top of a square foam core box, open on top and a cutout on one side, with several sheets of mylar drawing film as diffusers. Sunpak 544 in the cutout. Camera on a tripod with inverted head. Its working handily for MF.

Chris—interesting you mention that. I've had a lot of problems with shadow detail and grain with my LS-4000, especially with T-grain films. I've been assuming I still haven't gotten a good Vuescan workflow, but aliasing would explain some of my results. It's still far less tedious to batch scan with it, and go back and DSLR-scan something to enlarge.
__________________
Ian M., Seattle
Current bag contents: Just a Fuji GX680iii. Nothing else will fit.

--
my infrequently updated blog
Finally on Instagram
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:04.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.