Re: Epson 10000XL scanner and i1 profiler
Re: Epson 10000XL scanner and i1 profiler
- Subject: Re: Epson 10000XL scanner and i1 profiler
- From: Ernst Dinkla <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 09:44:17 +0200
Martin,
The main reason I went for wet mounting films on flatbed scanners and the
Nikon 8000 was creating flatness in the film first. That and tweaking the
film holder so it would have best focus at every corner of the film frame
made quite a difference in sharpening later one, both for the flatbeds and
the Nikon 8000. Before an area could pop up from the rest in editing just
by the sharpening applied. Mounting the film underneath the glass of the
holder also decreased the expansion of the film with the old hot light
source of the Epson 3200. Not that I think wet mounting solves the size
issue, the aspect ratio can still vary as the stepping versus the linear
sensor wells pitch is not so strictly corresponding in this kind of
scanners. That includes the Nikon 8000. I must have a PDF somewhere of a
test done by a British university whether they could replace expensive
medical scanners (Zeiss I think) with a Nikon 8000 or one they designed
themselves. The main issue was the size differences per scan run for the
Nikon. In my opinion the weak spot of the Nikon is the way the film holders
are kept in the holder carriage. Changing from frame one to the last frame
tips the holder from slanted forward to slanted backwards and by that the
focus on the ends of the film frame. I tweaked the holders that the sides
were both in focus and that the ends of both 6x9 frames had the best focus
compromise. The focus field stayed within 20 micron then. In the end I got
the impression that the focus field of the Nikon was actually not entirely
flat but slightly curved over the width of the holder, seen with more than
one wet mount holder I made. Flare is another issue but masking the film
frame as good as possible plus the better light transmission of wet
mounting solves part of that. At some point I thought about changing the
cover of the Nikon and making a clamp system on the holder carriage that
would fit a sheet of glass in balance and in focus. A wet mounted 6x9 film
could be scanned while another film is mounted on another glass sheet. No
shifting of frames in the holder carriage to avoid the weight overhang of
the holder.
Way back I asked (the late) Phil Lippincott whether he ever had
contemplated a flatbed scanner with a PMT or flying spot solution. Of
course he had was his answer. I do not think we will see that happening in
the future but it certainly has several advantages. Mounting film on a flat
surface is way easier than on a drum that has to rotate fast. Glass can be
used instead of acrylic. I could be as simple as using three flying spots
and still keep a linear CCD as the sensor. The flying spots using a
waving/weaving path over the length of the sensor. Not entirely the effect
of a PMT drum scanner but not bad either in theory.
--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
Dinkla Grafische Techniek
Quad, piëzografie, giclée
www.pigment-print.com
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Martin Orpen <email@hidden>
wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2014, at 17:20, MARK SEGAL <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> > No I did not account for flare as I have no technical method on hand for
> doing so. But it sounds as if it could well be part of the issue. Would you
> say the same for dedicated film scanners?
>
>
> Unless they include wet mounting and spot illumination — dedicated film
> scanners will suffer from a degree of flare.
>
> Additionally these devices also suffer from distortion because the
> original is *never* mounted flat.
>
> I’ll guarantee that, although in focus, all scanners that use film holders
> produce distorted images. You’ll only notice if you send a neg or
> transparency off for drum scanning and then overlay one scan on another.
> Your 6x7cm neg will be a number of mm short across the film width because
> the natural bow in the film is not corrected by the film holder.
>
> Drum mounted originals stay flat — they need to as the depth of field is
> only a handful of microns :-(
>
> --
> Martin Orpen
> Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
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