1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The best way to scan negatives..

Discussion in 'Everything Film' started by KierFX, Mar 10, 2016.

  1. KierFX

    KierFX Well-Known Member

    Development was mostly a success! there was a few trapped frames, however most are good. I googled around the other day and found the easiest way to scan the negatives was to use my home-scanner and to use my phone as a backlight. This works really well, however I can only do 2 negs at at time making it VERY time consuming.

    Whats the cheapest decent scanner I can use to scan my negatives more efficiently? Perhaps a backlit scanner or a dedicated film scanner?

    Thank you so much for the help, this forums so great for help.

  2. Bazarchie

    Bazarchie Well-Known Member

    There was a recent thread on this very subject. Search by scan?
  3. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Kier,

    Enlarger and wet printing...

    Glad to hear the developing went well.

    What chemicals did you use? And what do you mean by "trapped" frames?


  4. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    The ideal is a film scanner, but cheap and decent unfortunately don't go too well together. Many of the flatbeds that have film holders will do a decent job with negatives, it's transparencies that they handle less well.

    Roger is right about the enlarger and wet printing, a silver based mono print is rather better than an inkjet, it's down to tones, depth and the quality of the blacks. You need to have access to the kit though, which is where digitising wins.

    I assume trapped frames are overlaps where the film has not advanced fully when wound on.
  5. frank1

    frank1 Well-Known Member

    Be careful when using scanners on certain Windows OSs. Older models may not work but there is Vuescan and that will cost you something in the region £30-50. Scanning has got to be one of the most boring exercises in the photography game. Dedicated film scanners depending on what film format you're using are going to be a problem with Win 10.
  6. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    Currently using a Nikon Coolscan V ED with Nikon scan 4 software running under Win 10 no problem.
  7. Wheelu

    Wheelu Well-Known Member

    The cheapest reasonable solution, assuming that you have a digital camera, is to photograph them. You will probably need to bodge together a negative holder and use a half decent macro lens. I've tried using a cheap slide copier, but the included lens is poor and the quality is not acceptable.

    Back to scanners, I have an Epson 4990 flatbed photo scanner which continues to work with Win 10. It will do a job. I've scanned hundreds of negatives, and sold images scanned in that way, but the IQ is not quite there. Probably acceptable for large or medium format but marginal for 35mm. As others have said, a good dedicated film scanner is probably the way to go.

    Finally , if you only have a few to do, a good professional lab should be able to scan your negs and produce excellent results, assuming they have not all binned their drum scanners!
  8. frank1

    frank1 Well-Known Member

    I wish Canon would keep their drivers up to date but my flat bed and dedicated film scanners are quite old now. They would work with Vuescan but I have my old XP OS computer that I can utilise if I want. With digital cameras what's the point. I do have lots of film that I'd like to shoot but the time the effort the dust the bloody dust.
  9. KierFX

    KierFX Well-Known Member

    I used ilford chemicals; ilfosol 3, ilfostop, and rapid fixer.

    By trapped frames I mean frames that I think were touching inside the reel, so didn't develop.

  10. KierFX

    KierFX Well-Known Member

    I've seen "transparency adaptors' that allow negatives to be scanned on home scanners. Do they make universal ones of these, or are they just for specific scanner models?
  11. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    I think they used to call them hoods, I believe they were for individual models.
  12. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    They shouldn't touch inside the reel, I have never experienced this, even with rollfilm, which would be more likely to suffer from it.
  13. taxor

    taxor Well-Known Member

    +1 for the wet print method. But failing that and assuming the bug has bitten, a dedicated film scanner would be your best bet. But, if you get the chance, buy (or cadge) an enlarger, get the rest of the gear and get wet-printing. No farting about with screen resolutions or montor calibration - it really is WYSIWYG. Good luck, either way
  14. KierFX

    KierFX Well-Known Member

    wet printing is what I would much rather do but it's so different to digital, of course.

    Am I right in assuming that the kit I would need for enlarging would be
    • Enlarger
    • Enlarger lens
    • Paper chemicals
    • Paper
    • And those little trays
    This is literally what I think I'd need, from the top of my head. I would try enlarging for sure. Make it all analogue, haha.

  15. taxor

    taxor Well-Known Member

    That's pretty much all you need to start off. A timer for the enlarger would be very handy (blimey, when I first started out I used an in-line switch and counted 'one elephant, two elephant, three elephant...etc) as well as some means of temperature control for your chemicals. AND, of course, a dark room :)
  16. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    And a safety light for the darkroom, and access to a handy sink for final washing. Don't try and do printing while the kitchen/bathroom (delete as appropriate) is in use.
  17. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    ...and somewhere to dry the prints...and then clear up afterwards...

    ...er...why did most people stop wet printing exactly??
  18. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    And a printing frame / easel / masking frame to hold the paper flat on the enlarger baseboard and mask off white boarders.

    Yes, all the bits and pieces do add up don't they?

    I believe you might be able to use Ilfostop and Rapid Fixer for prints as well as film, not so sure about Ilfosol 3, though I think some developers can be used for prints and film.

    If you're using multigrade paper (fixed contrast grade seems hard to find these days) make sure the enlarger has the right colour filters.
  19. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Because they didn't really care enough about B+W photography, and prized convenience over quality. It really isn't difficult; you can get most or all of the equipment you need (Kier's list + thermometer + safelight + measuring jug/s) for nothing or next to nothing nowadays if you ask around at a camera club; the sink or washer can be several rooms away... The difficulties are serious only if you want them to be. Turn your question around: how were so many people so good at printing 30 years ago?

    Modern Multigrade is actually better than most old fixed-grade papers; filters/filter adapters are available for almost all enlargers; the same short stops and fixers can be made up in different batches for film and paper (don't use the same working solutions for both); "universal" developers are not a good idea; you don't need a masking easel to begin with; you can dry prints by hanging them on a line... All the objections here are surmountable (and were surmounted for well over 100 years by millions of amateurs).

    See also http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps how loo.html (converting a loo to a darkroom) and http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/darkroom.html "Our Darkrooms" -- since I was about 16.


  20. taxor

    taxor Well-Known Member

    I've never had access to a handy sink since day one. I run downstairs to the bathroom and get 'em in the wash as soon as.

Share This Page