LS-50: Further impressions

[Don]

Two more observations; one serious (focusing), the other (standard
image size) more cosmetic.

Migrating from LS-30 to LS-50, all of a sudden, film curl and
therefore focusing becomes an issue! On the LS-30 everything was so
fuzzy that it didn't make a lot of difference - not that much can be
physically (and easily) done when the film is cardboard-mounted
slides. However, with the increased resolution and resolving power of
the LS-50 there is clearly a noticeable focus problem with about 20
clicks (and more!) difference between the center and the edges not at
all unusual. Sampling focus around the image and then manually setting
an (un)happy medium just doesn't seem satisfactory.

One option may be to scan more than once focusing on different parts
of the image and then merging. So just when I thought I was free of
multi-pass scanning (to fix LS-30's lack of dynamic range) I may have
to go back to it to correct the focus. :-( Although that's much easier
to do than contrast merge, it's still a major pain, especially with
file sizes of the 4000 dpi, 14-bit scanner and, most of all, increased
misalignment of multi-pass scans due to more precision.

Finally, I like to have the same image size for all scans. At 2700 ppi
on the LS-30 I settled for 3600 x 2400 pixel crop which was just
perfect. Beautiful numbers divisible by everything under the sun! This
is so I can reduce my "digital negative" cleanly by various amounts
depending on intended usage e.g. for display on a desktop monitor,
display on a PDA, etc.

The trouble with 4000 ppi is that the standard image size is now very
awkward. The beautiful 3600 x 5400 crop is just a tad too large.
Instead, the closest usable crop (for mounted Kodachrome slides, at
least) appears to be around 3500 x 5250. And those numbers are just
soooo ugly! ;o)

Yes, I know, use 3600 x 5400, reduce and then trim afterwards but
that's just yet another messy step I'm trying to avoid because the
goal is a streamlined and efficient workflow. Oh well, you can't have
everything...

Don.

 

[Roberto_R]

Hello,
probably the FH-3 adapter is the only solution, specially with the first and
the last frame of the strip. I'm still waiting to receive it from the local
store, so I'm not sure this is the better thing to do to solve the problem.
But I can't see another.
Slides are better because the film is really flat.

Best,
Roberto

 

[Kennedy McEwen]

Hello,
probably the FH-3 adapter is the only solution, specially with the first and
the last frame of the strip. I'm still waiting to receive it from the local
store, so I'm not sure this is the better thing to do to solve the problem.
But I can't see another.
Slides are better because the film is really flat.

The FH-3 won't help in the case of the card mounted slides that Don is
having problems with. The only reliable solution is for him to
carefully transfer his card mounted slides to anti-newton ring glass
mounts - they will guarantee his film is held perfectly flat for optimum
corner to centre focus.

 

[Don]

Hi,

Yes, I plan to use the adapter myself for film strips, both negatives
and unmounted slides. However, my older slides are all mounted and
quite warped. In theory I could rip up the cardboard mount and then
use the holder but that's too messy, time consuming and I risk
damaging the slides in the process.

Regarding the FH-3 adapter, I was told on good authority (Kennedy)
that my old adapter FH-2 (from my old LS-30) will also fit in the
LS-50, so that's what I plan to use.

I think it's quite appalling and inexcusable that Nikon doesn't
include FH-3 as standard with the LS-50 but since FH-2 will apparently
also work you may widen your search if FH-3 is that difficult to find.

Don.

 

[Mike Engles]

The FH-3 won't help in the case of the card mounted slides that Don is
having problems with. The only reliable solution is for him to
carefully transfer his card mounted slides to anti-newton ring glass
mounts - they will guarantee his film is held perfectly flat for optimum
corner to centre focus.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

Hello

There ia problem with trapping dust, when you put slides between glass.
I also find with my glass slides, that the glass has a'noise pattern'on
it. It looks very like the pattern on a Kodachrome emulsion. I had to
actually take my GEPE glass mounted images out.

Mike Engles

 

[Don]

Hello

There ia problem with trapping dust, when you put slides between glass.

Yes, and in my particular case, ripping up cardboard mounts is bound
to release a fog of dust particles and other debris so...

I also find with my glass slides, that the glass has a'noise pattern'on
it. It looks very like the pattern on a Kodachrome emulsion.

(That's what anti-newton ring glass is for.)

....I just decided to grin and bare it. :-( On the plus side the
fuzziness around the edges has two semi-positive effects: it
eliminates grain somewhat and makes manual removal of dust and
scratches a little easier because it masks some of it. Since
Kodachromes can't be ICEd I have to do this by hand because I don't
like any of the automated procedures out there besides ICE.

Don.

 

[Roberto_R]

I think it's quite appalling and inexcusable that Nikon doesn't
include FH-3 as standard with the LS-50

Yes, it is!

but since FH-2 will apparently
also work you may widen your search if FH-3 is that difficult to find.

Don.

Thanks for the suggestion. I could try to find the FH-2.


Roberto