Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Bellows slide scanning, was so we moved house...

Subject: Re: [OM] Bellows slide scanning, was so we moved house...
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 19:03:39 -0500
It's worth the experiment and comparison with output from the Epson 
V700.  From your comments on old film I suspect most of the 
ektachrome/kodachome from my father's shots of the '50s will be 
adequately treated by the slide copier.  Maybe even my own stuff of the 
late 60s and 70s.  Getting the light right will just take some 
experimentation but I think I'd make the final exposure with flash.

Chuck Norcutt


On 1/5/2013 3:48 PM, Moose wrote:
> On 1/5/2013 9:32 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> I do have a 7mm tube, a 50/3.5 macro and oodles of flash.  But no live
>> view.  Perhaps a variable power studio light with 150 watt halogen
>> modeling lamp will allow manual focus w/o live view.
>
> I know CH doesn't trust light other than flash. Howsomever, I was pleased 
> with the color I got with a cheap 4x5,
> daylight balanced light 'table' allowed to warm up for 10 minutes or so.
>
> Using the original 5D, there's no live view, computer connection or not, so 
> good light for focusing is an issue.
> Especially for those with less than perfect vision, enough light to 'stop 
> down' the focusing eye is at least useful,
> perhaps necessary, for good results.
>
> I used 7mm tube, bellows, 80/4 Auto macro lens, slide copier, cheap generic 
> right angle finder with magnification and
> continuous light source. With decent light and viewfinder magnification, I 
> found it reasonably easy to focus well. I
> think f8 is the sweet spot for this lens, but on 13 MP, I think f11 is just 
> as good.
>
> At f11, with slides from the same roll, I think it's safe to focus once, as 
> the slide copier is good at holding them in
> the same place. Sticks of neg film seemed a little iffier to me because of 
> the way they have to be adjusted for framing
> by hand.
>
> If I were doing a lot of work with that set-up, I'd likely get a better 
> finder magnifier. Well, if I were doing a LOT,
> I'd pop for at least a camera with computer connected live view.
>
> For fine work on later film taken with good lens/technique, this method falls 
> short of a good 4000 dpi scanner. For a
> sea of frames, especially slides, it's probably more than good enough. For 
> older KR with ordinary lens, I just couldn't
> see any meaningful difference.
>
> As CH points out, it's certainly faster than any other method of 'scanning'. 
> Whether it's more time effective overall
> may depend on one's scanner and work flow. I've meant to compare it to batch 
> scanning on the FS4000, but it seems I
> enjoy creating new images more than reviving old ones these days - and life 
> happens. :-)
>
> Hmmm, I'm wondering how it would work with the E-M5. 1:2 repro ratio would 
> roughly fill a 4/3 frame, giving the output
> eq. of 1:1 on FF. That might be 50/3.5 territory, right on the border between 
> it and the 80/4.
>
> Reproductive Moose
>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz