Can a £30 Gadget Radically Improve My 35mm Film Scans? I Getting More Contrast, Sharpness and Colour

No video

Can a £30 Gadget Radically Improve My 35mm Film Scans? I Getting More Contrast, Sharpness and Colour

Рет қаралды 681

Күн бұрын

I've been incrementally improving my set-up for scanning and processing film negatives in-house (without spending large amounts of cash) over the course of the past year. Here I take another step forward (I think) and share my experience in the hope it will help others looking to improve their set-ups.
This video shows the unboxing of a new gadget, what settings I use for scanning, and the workflow for processing the results. I finish with a before/after slideshow of some of my images from the last 12 months.
There's also a bonus slideshow of photographs from a 'mini-project' I carried out over the last month or so, looking at colours in the summer city.
#photography #scanning #developingfilm #lightbox #slideshow #cameragear

Пікірлер: 7

@malman1080 Ай бұрын

Extension tubes are not really the greatest option to get closer to the negative. A good, modern macro lens is always the better option. I recently upgraded my setup and got a hold of h to e 7artisans 60mm f2.8 macro and it is lovely! Also, another recent acquisition was a copy of negative lab pro. Sped up my workflow immensely and it’s always a hot key away in Lightroom. It’s wonderful even for black and white work. Finally one last upgrade that I would suggest, the lomography digitaliza plus. It’s quite expensive but it’s similar to the negative carrier you own. In that it acts as its own light source but there two key differences. For 35mm it has a dial that you use to roll the film into the next frame. Which has been handy for sure! It also takes medium format if you remove the 35mm adapter. It takes up to 6x7 negatives, which is a bit of a shame since I’d really like to photograph some 6x9 images some day.

@studioswinden Ай бұрын

Hi, thanks for watching and commenting. I’m sure you’re right about all those options being a good way to go to improve quality and workflow but I’m working both on a really tight budget and trying to keep my process as hands on and under my control (rather than software’s) as possible...without going completely to optical enlarging and printing. I won’t rule out getting a macro lens and maybe even trying out some new software in future though. Thanks again and have a good week 🙂

@ianhand5006 Ай бұрын

I scan 8X11mm Minox subminiature negatives with a Fuji XE-1 and a Canon FD 50mm macro lens on extension tubes. I don’t bother with colour film, but I may give it a go as I’ve got a C41 developer kit.

@studioswinden Ай бұрын

Thanks for watching! Yes, I’ve never processed C-41...just B&W...but I prefer to pay less at the lab (and get a quicker turnaround often) by going dev only and scanning the negs myself. Plus, it’s the extra level of control over the output 🙂

@markillsley6488 29 күн бұрын

Interesting video. First I have to ask why are you using such a high ISO on a something that does not move? Shoot it at base iso with a longer exposure time, job done. Next get yourself a mirror. place the mirror on top of the light source and then use liveview to level the camera using the reflection. you can use either framing guides or the focus square set in the centre of the frame.

@studioswinden 29 күн бұрын

Hi, thanks for watching, and for taking the time to offer some helpful suggestions. Regarding ISO, the base for the Lumix is 200, which is what I am using with the new set-up...but I had to use a higher ISO with the old lightbox because its light was not bright enough for me to be able to use a narrow aperture with a shutter speed fast enough to avoid any motion blur...which was occurring mainly because of my lack of a proper negative holder (so I was using a hand to hold the 3D printed holder against the flexible plastic, and the tiny amount of inevitable hand movement was magnified by the macro, leading to blur). Also, as the lightbox was flexible, the height of the negative - and therefore it's image size in the frame - shifted fractionally during longer exposures, causing more blur. Silly things really, but at the time (having been making do with foam and a phone before) I didn't think the higher ISO would add significant noise and so it seemed a simple soloution. In retrospect it probably did. I live and learn 😂