Self developing film thread

>>3035450
Probably shit/decent,
but just get a Canon CanoScan 9000F or something. It's twice the price, but why not invest in something proper that will also last you a long time.

>>3035456
>Probably shit/decent,
most probably a turbo piece of shit.

OP, just learn to dslr cuck scan or either get a v500/v600. any other option is too expensive or def whack.

>>3035450
Don't pay more than 40 bucks for one of these.

Just buy a macro lens it's faster and easier once you set up a copy stand

>>3035469
>>3035502
Are you saying to photograph them and then what? Invert them in lightroom/ photoshop or whatever?

>>3035510
use a macro to take a photo with them over a light panel (opal acrylic spaced over a tablet screen showing white works fine in a pinch), set up your camera on a stand with a remote release. take photos fo all the negs, crop them in lightroom, export tiffs, open them in vuescan, bam, decent quality scans.

lab scans suck cock, that little device sucks more cock.

>>3035512
can be done without a macro lens?

>>3035528
not really, 1:2 is about the minimum you want, 1:1 ideally. an old manual focus macro lens is suitable, and these can be had cheap.

>>3035528
i use an inverted 50mm lens.

>>3035534
Tamron Adaptall 90mm Macro. There are two versions, both are sharp and easy to use. You will need an extension tube for the earlier model to reach 1:1 though.

>>3035512
How would you deal with film that bows? Use a sheet of glass from a photo frame?

>>3035528
What do you think of 70-300 f2.8 APO Sigma?

Is that lens any good?

please use this thread next time >>3033056

>>3035578
Get some anti reflective glass, one side is verylightly etched which prevents newton rings. You can get it from a framing store, I got a free sample from my local one.

>>3035695
I presume you meant the 70-200, it's a good lens, but not suitable for macro shots of film. What body are you using?

>>3035534
ive got an olympus zuiko 50mm 1.8 an adaptor to fit my em5. so with a 100mm equivalent would this work?

>>3035930
Should do, you may need an extension tube.

>>3035930
Focal length is not the same as the ability to focus closer or reprodution ratio.

>>3035957
m43 does change the reproduction ratio required though, to fill the frame on m43 with a single frame of 35mm you only need 1:4 macro.

File: P30804161low.jpg (750KB, 2715x2172px) Image search: [Google]

750KB, 2715x2172px

not OP but just tried to do a GhettoScan with things i had at hand.
I know it's shitty but this was the setup:
A tablet with a lightbox app for backlighting the neg, which was pressed between two glasses.
The camera i used was my Olympus E-410 (i know, four thirds) with the 25mm pancake lens and a +4macro magnifier that came with a lensbaby.
As the pancake ring is 43mm and the macro glass is 37mm i had to handhold it in front of the lens.
Also, no tripod.
In fact im a bit surprised that it didn't came that bad taking in account the completely utter shit setup i did.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-410
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2715
Image Height	2172
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:08 12:14:34
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2715
Image Height	2172
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Soft

File: P30804191low.jpg (734KB, 2622x2098px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 2622x2098px

>>3036051
this is another one of my GhettoScan setup.
my main problem is, sometimes i get the focus right on the film but sometimes it focus on the tablet screen and the pixels get really visible as in this one

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-410
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2622
Image Height	2098
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:08 12:16:20
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2622
Image Height	2098
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Soft

File: PRD0001289.jpg (7KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 400x400px

>>3036051
>>3036052
Not bad at all but I can still see the pixels array from that tablet. Try putting a groud glass or something like a transparent matte plastic thing on top of the tablet

File: 1488992104199.jpg (705KB, 2100x1392px) Image search: [Google]

705KB, 2100x1392px

>>3036051
10 seconds on gimp for you.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-410
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:08 14:41:55
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2100
Image Height	1392
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Soft

>>3036066
yeah, i was thinking of that, it should work to hide the pixel array.
There's any DIY solution for fixing the 37mm macro glass to the 43mm ring of the lens?
Where do i live i'm sure im not gonna find any conversor rings

>>3036051
>>3036068

>museu de arte contemporaneo
Are you from venezuela? How are you not dead by now? How come you didn't sell your camera for food?

>>3036073
Do you have like a 43mm plastic lens cap? Can't you convert it do an adaptor?

>>3036074
i prefer to eat less and still be able to take photos, that's how i roll
>>3036076
nope, the lens cap of the pancake lens is all-metal.
my other two lenses are like 58mm but don't want to fuck the caps for a DIY.

>>3036073
conversion rings are cheap with cheap postage from china, just look on ebay. a macro extension tube would be preferable to a secondary optic though and they're crazy cheap.
opal acrylic spaced about a cm from the tablet is what you want, opal acrylic is the industry standard diffusion method for lighting.

>>3035854
Canon 40D

File: P3080475scan2low.jpg (903KB, 3648x2736px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 3648x2736px

>>3036052
Improved a bit, i separated about one centimeter the neg from the tablet screen, and this time shot in RAW. also used the +4 and +10 macro rings together

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-410
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Color Filter Array Pattern	830
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3648
Image Height	2736
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:08 18:36:53
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3648
Image Height	2736
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Soft

>>3035450
LIDL has these for £30 something on occasion.

Use a DSLR instead, if you have one.
Even a phone does a better job

>>3036191
You need something to block light between the negative and the camera. There's too much ambient light bleeding in. That's why I prefer using a softbox contraption.

>>3036191
I don't know if it's your camera or the negative that is out of focus.

File: IMG_20160304_0002.jpg (2MB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1000x1000px

>>3035450
These things are fucking horrible. My mom bought one for scanning old slides, against my advice, and the results are god-awful. I think you'd get better results with a lightbox and a smartphone.

I use a Canon 9000F MkII and it's OK for scanning 6x6 for casual usage (i.e. posting on /p/) but I don't know if it's really good enough for anything with 35mm. (This photo was with a beat up Mamiya C33, BTW. I have a Hasselblad now, but I've been procrastinating on processing my photos so nothing interesting to post from it.)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2400 dpi
Image Created	2016-03-04T19:36:01+16:00

I bought a PlusTek 8200i to start processing my parent's slides. There's a few thousand of them and I figure it's worth at least making decent copies.

Features like hardware dust removal (IR scan) make it well worth the insane price.

Is there any of those chinese scanners that do 120 film?