Scanning negatives

[donmcc]

Does anyone have any experience with scanning negatives. I discovered that one of the collections in my local town museum is a collection of several thousand negatives that were once owned by the local photographers.

These would all be stored as b&W (primarily) negatives, although there will be some color. I would hate to have to get them all printed in a darkroom. Are there any tricks to scanning from the negative, then Photoshopping to create a digital file?

I hope to apply for a Heritage grant to allow (college) students to do such work.

[Bo Aakerstrom]

No tricks, you just need the right equipment.

A film scanner would be your best option, sadly these days they are not so easy to come by. I would have recommended one of Nikon's CoolScan units, but they are no longer available AFAIK. Perhaps EBAY is your friend here?

Plustek OpticFilm (http://plustek.com/uk/products/opticfilm-series/introduction.html) is one option, even if the software seems to be a weak spot. A 3rd party application would resolve that.

Hasselblad's more expensive offering (http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/product.asp?P_ID=1272&PT_ID=396) is another.

Avoid using a flatbed scanner with a film attachment, I had a Canon CanoScan 9000 F, for a very short while. Not only painfully slow, the output was not much to write home about either.

[terrie]

donmcc: Are there any tricks to scanning from the negative, then Photoshopping to create a digital file?Are they all 35mm?

As Bo notes, you need a film scanner (or a flatbed that will scan negs/slides--never used my Epson 2450 to scan negs/slides). As Bo also noted, dedicated neg/slide scanners can be hard to find and ebay is a good place to look. If you need other than 35mm, it gets trickier to find equipment...

I'd definitely recommend getting VueScan (http://www.hamrick.com/) to use as your scanning software--wait until you know which scanner you will be using because while Vuescan works with most scanners (http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/vuescan.htm#supported), there are probably some it doesn't work with...

My scanning has been primarily (actually...all) with slides but I think with Vuescan you'd find neg scanning to be not that big a deal. I scan using VueScan basically doing the scans in batches--saved as TIFFs--and then I work on a group of scans in Photoshop--the Healing brush is absolutely indispensable because no matter how hard you try, you're never going to get a really clean neg/slide.

A few months ago, I boought a Plustek OptiFilm 7200 on ebay for a very good price--it was missing the power cord which I was able to find inexpensively online. It only does 35mm (negs/slides).

Terrie

[donmcc]

That is the thing, they will have many that are larger formats, as they are older files from the 50s and before.

Thanks for the links.

[terrie]

donmcc: That is the thing, they will have many that are larger formats, as they are older files from the 50s and before.Ahhh...that's what I thought might be the case...

I'd take a browse at ebay for slide scanners (http://computers.shop.ebay.com/Photo-Slide-Film-Scanners-/101353/i.html?_catref=1&_fln=1&_trksid=p3286.c0.m282) and see what's out there...I'll try and see what I can find...

Terrie

[BobRoosth]

Yes, you need a dedicated film scanner. That is the only kind that really understands how to remove the orange mask used in negative film.

Actually, I suppose Vuescan might know how to do that. I've never looked. I just know it needs to be done at the scanning stage, not later in Photoshop (or equivalent).

[donmcc]

The orange mask only applies in color negs, right? Photoshop should be able to fix a scan of a B&W photo.

[Bo Aakerstrom]

The orange mask only applies in color negs, right? Photoshop should be able to fix a scan of a B&W photo.

The main issue with colour negatives is that different film manufacturers/ film types use different colour masks, so it takes some amount of trial and error to fix, but when you have established what works you can always save it to use for that particular emulsion. Photographers tends to use the same film stock for most things, so hopefully this chap have done so too.

At least in The GIMP, the "auto white balance" works wonders, most of the time. I assume there is an equivalent option in Photoshop?

[Steve Rindsberg]

Way back in the days when you had to scan one pixel at a time and chisel its RGB values into the rock you were working on, I had a Howtek slide scanner. It was the most expensive, time-sucking, unreliable and ultimately useless pile of crap I've ever wasted money on.

It did have one feature that might apply here: for color negs, it'd have you scan a blank section of film (ie, processed but unexposed) to get a baseline for the orange mask. It'd save that as part of the profile for that particular film, then remove the orange color during the scan.

Then it'd crash or lock up or freeze or something equally annoying.

But it was a great idea. Could photoshop subtract an image of raw film from an image of exposed film and land on something useful, do you think?

[Bo Aakerstrom]

Could photoshop subtract an image of raw film from an image of exposed film and land on something useful, do you think?
That's roughly how I would approach it if I had to go that route.

Pick the colour and save it under the name of the film type, so you can reuse it.

Create a new layer filled with the colour (as is or inverted) and have play with various blend modes and opacity levels.

Once you have established what works save the actions (or whatever PS calls it).

Or perhaps there are better ways to do this?

[BobRoosth]

Certainly.

[terrie]

Ok...using the link I'd posted before and also searched on 'film scanner' (did use single quote marks), I browsed around ebay and there is lots and lots of 35mm scanners available but not much in the way of medium/large format neg scanners but I did find a Microtek i900 Medium Format (also does 35mm) scanner (http://cgi.ebay.com/Microtek-i900-Scanner-Medium-Large-Format-Film-/220812242335?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item33696f6d9f) listed with a buy it now price of $99 (ebay item number: 220812242335 in case the link above doesn't work). I'd suggest taking a look at this one...asap and do the buy it now...

Alternatively, buy a 35mm film/slide scanner inexpensively on ebay--I've been pleased with the Plusteck OptiFilm 7200 I bought and I have my old Minolta Dimage II (might sell that on ebay)--and then search for a service that could scan the larger format negs for you.

Terrie

[donmcc]

It was sold before I got to it, but thanks for looking. I can't buy that quick anyway ... it would require an entire grant process. I really looking for something in a couple years (things move slowly in education).

Good to know that such a beast exists. It looks like just what I would need.

[donmcc]

So you could take a pixel sample from the border area of the image, which is generally clear, and then use that?

Don

[Steve Rindsberg]

Same idea, yes. I'd go for the clear area between frames rather than at the edges, where there are more likely to be processing artifacts that'd throw everything off.

[terrie]

donmcc: It was sold before I got to it, but thanks for looking. I can't buy that quick anyway ... it would require an entire grant process. I really looking for something in a couple years (things move slowly in education).Too bad it was gone--figured that might happen.


>>Good to know that such a beast exists. It looks like just what I would need.

I thought it did too...did a quick searh on 'microtek i900 scanner' (used the single quote marks) and found an amazon listing with more spec details (http://www.amazon.com/Microtek-ScanMaker-i900-Flatbed-Scanner/dp/B00018JMZU)...that you might find useful...and another place (http://novatechgadgets.com/mici900.html) that actually has it in stock...

Terrie

[John Spragens]

I wonder how the market for film scanners is going to play out over the course of a couple of years, or however long it takes to get the grant and set things in motion.

The last of the Nikon scanners just dropped off the market in the past year or two. It's easy to imagine the used market drying up, as well. But equally easy to imagine that people who bought in the past few years will be finishing up their projects and wanting to sell their scanners.

I have a Minolta DiMage Scan Multi Pro. With the right carriers, it can scan film up to 6 x 9 cm, which gets a lot of the older roll film sizes. Nikon made one -- the Super Coolscan 9000 ED -- that could handle a similar range of film sizes.

When the scanners go off the market, the driver updates stop coming, too. That's why VueScan is such a big help. It'll run under a wide range of operating systems and talk with a huge number of scanners. Personally, though, I prefer the Minolta software for mine, and I'm maintaining archaic operating systems (Windows 2000, and holding with Snow Leopard on the Mac side) so I can continue to use the Minolta software.

For processing the scans, a lot depends on the quality you need. If you just need to be able to identify people and places, you can sacrifice a lot of quality and save a lot of time. (And maybe even get satisfactory results from a flatbed scanner with film-scanning capabilities.)

I've gotten in the habit of a workflow that begins with a "linear" scan, which I then run through a Photoshop plug-in called ColorPerfect [http://www.c-f-systems.com/Plug-ins.html]. That inverts the scan (the linear scans of negatives produce a negative image) and, in the process, preserves a very good range of grays (or more colorful midtones in color images). But it's kind of fiddly, so if speed is important, you might not want to bother with that.

I second the kudos for Photoshop's spot healing brush. But, again, you can wind up spending an hour or two or even more on just one scan if you want to get it looking really good. If you just need to be able to recognize faces and places, you may not want to invest the time to clean things up that much.

[terrie]

john: I have a Minolta DiMage Scan Multi Pro. With the right carriers, it can scan film up to 6 x 9 cm, which gets a lot of the older roll film sizes. I knew Minolta made a scanner that scanned other sizes in addition to 35mm but I couldn't remember which model so thanks for mentioning yours...'-}}


>>I second the kudos for Photoshop's spot healing brush. But, again, you can wind up spending an hour or two or even more on just one scan if you want to get it looking really good. If you just need to be able to recognize faces and places, you may not want to invest the time to clean things up that much.

That's certaining something that can be done well after the fact rather than immediately after scanning and it could be that I just have particularly dirty slides but even using a slide/neg cleaning brush, I still find lots of crud in my scans...'-}}

I know there some sort of solution one can buy--PEC?--and I've considered it but then I'd have to dismount and remount my slides which seems more trouble than using the Healing brush however, for negatives it might be worth getting...

Terrie

[John Spragens]

I know there some sort of solution one can buy--PEC?--and I've considered it but then I'd have to dismount and remount my slides which seems more trouble than using the Healing brush however, for negatives it might be worth getting...

You also increase the risk of doing physical damage to the film or emulsion any time you use cleaning solutions on the film.

I don't know what trained archivists recommend. In recent years I've avoided any attempts to do more than blow and brush dust off.

With some of my pix, that means there's a lot of Photoshop clean-up to be done. And much of the oldest and dirtiest of the film is half-frame 35mm, so each little mote of dust is twice as much damage.

[terrie]

john: You also increase the risk of doing physical damage to the film or emulsion any time you use cleaning solutions on the film.Yes...I think that's another reason I've not pursued other cleaning methods...


>>With some of my pix, that means there's a lot of Photoshop clean-up to be done. And many of the oldest and dirtiest of the film is half-frame 35mm, so each little mote of dust is twice as much damage.

It always amazes me how much crap shows up in the scan...'-}}

Photoshop's Healing brush does make life much easier but it can be quite tedious although I always feel like I've accomplished something when I've finished...'-}}

Terrie

[John Spragens]

Photoshop's Healing brush does make life much easier but it can be quite tedious

Definitely makes me feel good about investing in a Wacom tablet. Much easier with a stylus than with a mouse, especially for small spots.

With a mouse, you have to reduce the brush size appropriately, then kick it back up when you're dealing with larger spots. With the tablet, you can take advantage of the pressure sensitivity to modulate the size of the spot you're affecting, up to the brush size you've set for the tool.

So, for example, I tend to work with a brush size set to 19 pixels most of the time, but by using light pressure I can blip out dust motes as small as a single pixel (assuming the surrounding area has appropriate values for the spot healing brush to sample).

[terrie]

john: Definitely makes me feel good about investing in a Wacom tablet. Much easier with a stylus than with a mouse, especially for small spots. That's funny...I find the opposite to be true...I found the mouse much easier and quicker...I don't use my tablet that much in Photoshop but I use it almost exclusively in Painter...


>>So, for example, I tend to work with a brush size set to 19 pixels most of the time, but by using light pressure I can blip out dust motes as small as a single pixel (assuming the surrounding area has appropriate values for the spot healing brush to sample).

I will try it with the stylus next time...

Which Wacom do you have? I've got the Intuos 2...

Terrie

[John Spragens]

Mine's a couple of generations later -- an Intuos 4.

[terrie]

john: an Intuos 4. ahhh...every once in a while I think about upgrading to a new tablet, but my current Intuos 2 is still working quite well so I've not taken the plunge for a new one...

Terrie

[John Spragens]

I was doing a bunch of reconfiguration as I switched to a Mac for my main workhorse. The Intuos 4 is on USB (my older tablet was for an old-style serial port), and my new KVM switch will switch the tablet among computers, along with the keyboard, mouse, and dual monitors.

Also, I'd had a really big tablet before. I went down to the medium-size model this time and find it's more convenient for what I do with the tablet -- mainly spotting photos.

[terrie]

john: The Intuos 4 is on USB (my older tablet was for an old-style serial port) Ahhh...I haven't seen a serial ported tablet in a long time...my first tablet was from Calcomp and it was quite nice (and way less pricey than the Wacoms) and I got my 2nd tablet via ebay--a rebranded Calcomp--and I'm pretty sure it was my first usb tablet. When I had my system before my current setup built, I finally succumbed to a Wacom primarily since Calcomp was no longer making tablets...



>>Also, I'd had a really big tablet before. I went down to the medium-size model this time and find it's more convenient for what I do with the tablet -- mainly spotting photos.

I've always used a "medium" size-ish tablet--6x8-ish--as anything larger just seemed like it would too large and of course a medium size is less pricey...'-}}

Was it much of an adjustment to move to the smaller tablet?

Terrie

[John Spragens]

No adjustment at all, really, since it had been a longish time since I'd used the older tablet. It's one of those bits of gear I have not because I use it often but because it makes my life so much more pleasant when I do have a good reason to use it.

[terrie]

john: It's one of those bits of gear I have not because I use it often but because it makes my life so much more pleasant when I do have a good reason to use it. LOL! I know exactly what you mean...'-}}

I don't know why but I rarely use my tablet in Photoshop but I use it extensively in Painter--a tablet is essential for Painter...

Terrie

[John Spragens]

I can well imagine.

What ever happened to Painter's sibling Expression? It was the vector-based program from Fractal Design. Did it die, or did somebody pick it up and continue development?

[Bo Aakerstrom]

Sold to Microsoft and now called Microsoft Expression Design.

Corel's Painter came from them as well.

[terrie]

bo: Corel's Painter came from them as well. I can't remember the progression for Painter but MetaCreations was in there someplace...maybe it was Fractal Design > MetaCreations > Corel?

I started with Painter 4...

Terrie

[John Spragens]

Sold to Microsoft and now called Microsoft Expression Design.

Guess that pretty much rules out chances for a Mac version.

And my fall-back Windows box runs W2K, so no good there, either.