Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 4, Issue 408
Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 4, Issue 408
- Subject: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 4, Issue 408
- From: Brian Lawler <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:42:14 -0800
Hi gang,
As a former Crosfield drum-scanner owner-operator, I will chime-in
here...
The oil we used on the Crosfield is called Paraffin Oil. It's easy to
get. Chevron makes it to this day in one-gallon bottles. It's a
relatively safe, easy-to-handle hydrocarbon with moderately fast
evaporative characteristics.
We started with a clear sheet of acetate taped to the drum, then put
a couple of drops of Paraffin Oil into the gap between the drum and
the acetate.
Then, after cleaning original film carefully, we would insert the
film into the gap, directly into the oil.
Then, on the drum mounting table, we would squeeze the acetate
against the drum, pushing the oil across both surfaces of the film
between the acetate and the drum. At the end we would tape the
acetate against the drum and then put the drum on the scanner.
We had to examine each one very carefully, looking for air bubbles
that might have worked their way into the sandwich. If found, it was
back to the table to try again.
After scanning, we would dismount all of that stuff, discard the
acetate, and then use standard film cleaner, something called PEC-12,
to remove the residue of the Paraffin Oil from the transparencies.
Sandwiching the final, clean film between two sheets of clean paper
would allow the film cleaner to be absorbed into the paper.
The whole process was time consuming and therefore expensive. I timed
it often, and fund that the average time needed to get film onto the
scanner took about seven minutes. Scanning took a variable amount of
time depending on the final size of the film we were making, and
other factors.
The scanner cost just over $250,000, and the ancillary equipment
another $50,000. The BHR for the scanner work area, including the
operator, was about $125.00, based on a five-year payback on the
capital equipment. It was an expensive operation, and it required a
lot of C&F (Care and Feeding).
The handling of original films was the bane of my existence. My
operators often treated originals as if they were scrap once the
scanning was completed. They would throw them around, leave them in
the paper absorbers, and treat them with disdain. Why, I never knew.
Getting them to remount 35mm slides with care took an extraordinary
amount of cajoling (threatening?).
You can get a wet-gate film holder for the Nikon 9000 scanner, and
it's capable of suspending originals in paraffin oil during scanning.
This, combined with the high quality of that scanner, would probably
yield an excellent image (I don't have one of these film holders, so
this is supposition).
I don't scan much film these days, but when I do, I use either an
Epson flat-bed or my Nikon 9000, both of which I find do an
extraordinary job.
And, 5.0 density... that's pretty hard to swallow. Perhaps it was X-
ray film?
Best wishes,
Brian P. Lawler
Brian P. Lawler
Assistant Professor
Graphic Communication
and Humanities Programs
Cal Poly University
San Luis Obispo, California 93407
Tel: 805 756-1107
Fax: 805 756-7118
E-Mail: email@hidden
Web: www.thelawlers.com
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden