For sure! You don’t have to go with the manfrotto, as long as it’s sturdy enough to hold your camera. I’m using a lot of their products and happened to have a few things laying around, but there are many products out there. The used market is also interesting since many of these products are tough enough to last a lifetime.
You just reminded me that I have an old, very solid Manfrotto tripod head sitting on the shelf that hasn’t been used in 10 years. Perfect project for it.
i used to dslr scan with a tripod but eventually bought a stand. the film holder is partly my own creation. a combination of a film scanner film holder and a rail i built myself. i find the dslr scanning fast and accurate. however, i don't intend shooting films anymore. i have a ton of old negatives and slides that i shoot prior to the digital era that need to get digitized.
Thanks for posting. I went a similar route, although instead of a pipe and flange, I used a £2.50 black table leg from IKEA which I mounted from beneath the ply board (12" x 15") and protruding upward through a suitable diameter hole (40mm) for a clean surface appearance. I also covered the base with a neoprene mat to protect the surface I used the stand on. To ensure the camera axis remained parallel to the table leg and was easy to reposition vertically to cater for different media, I employed a 30cm arca swiss rail secured to the table leg with a pipe clamp at each end and then used a back to back arca swiss clamp to attach the camera to the rail. The other advantage of this approach was that the leg (optionally with fittings) can easily be unscrewed from the base for storage convenience. Total cost inc taxes and shipping £32.50 (crab claw clamp x2 £8.54, Bexin QR-50B double sided arca swiss clamp £14.44, PU-300 arca swiss 30cm rail £7 - all from AliExpress, except the off-cut of ply which I got from a friend for free and the £2.50 table leg from IKEA . lol)
@@mosfear I received your email! Great stuff, thank you for sharing, very nice approach. I like the arca rail as well, makes it easier for slight adjustments. (Also I will update RUclips to add my email, thanks)
Thats awesome ALEX!! I use my Manfrotto Tripod as it can go horizontal. I level the lens X & Y in a few seconds and get the correct height. I use my 5D III with a EF24-105 f4L with extension tubes so I can get really close. I have a new light table/box and I hand made my own film holder from card stock, sheet plastic, & felt. I made it to hold both 35mm and 120 medium format in 2 cutouts side by side. I also lettered it and made cleaves for either side as I shoot 1 format at a time. It works very well and keeps the film flat and level. Keep up the great ingenuity!
Thank you!! You have done a lot of work, I would be interested to see your custom film holders. The tripod is definitely a good option and one that many people may already have at home. I too have a manfrotto one that goes horizontal but I wanted something permanent that I would use only for film scanning without the need to set up every time. Do you place yours on a table for easier reach or do you do it on the ground?
I have an enlarger (Don-111, cost me an equiv. of $25). For scanning film I remove it’s head, which is quite easy, and place on it’s mount a crab clamp with a magic arm on. I find it more convenient than the simpler setup shown in a video, since I have a height adjustment knob which makes focus and framing adjustment simpler. Also, quite critically, you need to either eliminate all lighting in the room, or, like I did, use something like a tube between the lens and the film holder - this eliminates stray reflections on the film that may spoil your scans.
Nice, the height adjustment sounds convenient. It would be a bit faster to switch from 35mm to 120. Focusing is quite easy with the live view and as I shoot tethered I can judge the results on the big screen immediately. As for the light in the room, I have a single window, so it is easy to block and I too have added a tube in my workflow to remove any excess light coming from the film holder.
I built almost the same copy stand about three years ago. 2 foot long 1.5" pipe and flange mounted to an old, thick wooden cutting board. Mounting clamp attached to pipe, then tripod head attached to mounting clamp. It was rock solid. As I was only going to photo scan B&W 4x5's, color temp and full spectrum weren't important, so I used a light box I built as the light source for reviewing slides and negatives over 30 years ago. It worked great. Disassembled the copy stand at completion but kept all parts in case I ever want to do more photo scanning. It all goes back together in about 5 minutes.
That’s great! It’s a very good solution. Easy to assemble, cheap but rock solid. The parts are easy to source and you can upgrade any component if you ever need to. Unlike conventional scanners where you are stuck with what you have.
I lucked out years ago; purchased a Kaiser copy stand from eBay, like new, for $125. It's been working fine for me with a standard little 4x5 daylight balanced lightbox. I use a piece of anti-Newton ring glass to hold the negs flat on the 4x5 plexi top of the lightbox. I tape the glass, about the size of a 120 negative strip, along the long edge to the top of the light source. I've made super sharp images from 35mm b&w and color negs as well as medium format negatives of various sizes. I used a Nikon Z7 with the 50 macro lens. Having a flip up screen with touch focus made it very easy. I used some black paper to cover the remaining area of the lightbox to avoid flare. It might be overkill for most people but I really liked getting 45mp digital images from all my old negs. I was able to digitize all of my negs in about 40 hours. I could shoot about 150-200 images in an hour or two each evening. I have a flatbed Canon scanner, and the quality of the scans for medium format were a little better using the Canon scanner. Between the ANR glass and a thin sheet of plastic diffusion plastic (like tracing paper) I think I was getting better tonal range. Canoscan software feels preferable to Epson 4990 software. I really liked your copystand with cutting sheet for alignment. I think it's every bit as good as the Kaiser stand. Thank you for this video.
Sounds like a nice setup you have there! 45mp can be quite much for all photos, but then again if you have the space for it then no harm having some extra resolution. As for the canon scanner, I haven’t seen any scans from it, I would be interested to see how it performs against you camera setup. Thank you for watching and commenting!
Such a great video, I've been frustrated with the cost of home scanning equipment and this is a very easy solution. I've just purchased everything I needed (Pipe + Flange, Manfrotto Super Clamp (+ 3/8" pin), Film Holder (+ 6x6 mask), Ball tripod head) for a total of £167 which is the cost of a prebuilt copy stand alone. I already have a light source and plywood which would have added another £40-50 however which is worth noting if anyone is planning to build this in 2024. Thank you for sharing!
Nice to hear! I hope you get a good use out of it. It’s still one of the sturdiest and cheapest solutions out there. And I love the modularity of the whole dslr scanning process. Every part is easily upgradable, unlike flatbed or other dedicated film scanners. And once you are done with the upfront costs you will not have to worry for anything else. You can send me a photo as well, I’d be happy to see it once you complete it. Thank you for watching!
Hi, Your setup looks neat and very workable to me. I went slightly differently: I bought an old and worn-out Magnifaks enlarger, took off the lamp housing and installed a tripod head. It worked fine too. For the light source, I am using a mixing chamber made out of a wooden box and styrofoam lining, with an old reliable Sunpak 383 flash at 90 degrees angle to the diffusion opening. F-stop 11-16 at 1/16th power. As a modeling light, I glued to the bottom of the mixing chamber a small LED bare light which has a separate switch. This setup works well for me.
Thank you for this. Im using this in addition to an Epson v600 to scan 35mm. This was just the nudge I needed to assemble 1” thick 30” length pipe/flange/1” plywood for myself. Mounted super clamp/kirk bh3/5d mark ii/180mm L with long plate. Even with .5m working distance, it seems plenty stable enough for my use.
I built something very similiar around the same time you released this video, based on a few different designs I saw on reddit and RUclips. I used a pre-finished, large wood cutting board for a base and raw iron pipe which looks very nice and rustic to me. I'm using the same super clamp but a cheap ball head which is aggravating to adjust so I like to get something better like you have. I'd like to work a macro focusing rail into it as well for precise camera movements.
Nice! Yeah a macro focusing rail would make the process more finessed. I wonder if they are long enough to allow switching from 35mm distance to 120 without the need to move the whole head up and down.
@@alexandermatragos I've seen them long enough for that but they are pricy. With my micro-nikkor 55/3.5 I've been able to scan 35mm, 120, and 4x5 from the same height by switching extension tubes, and I sort of use the arca swiss mount to get a little bit of precision movement without moving the clamp. I've ordered a Canon macro 100/2.8L I'm excited to try though. Focusing and framing with the nikkor is a pain.
I used 1 1/4" pipe and flange, and all the rest were things found around the studio. The pipes were $35 and $12 for a 3/8ths" tap set . . . $7 for odd screws, bolt, and nut. Like you, I had a spare tripod head which I attached to the top (nipple) using the tap, and had an old Manfrotto Art. 3419 (now #454) microadjust sliding mount for fine tuning the vertical ($150). Your use of the Super Clamp is a $40 option, which I like . . . and I can return the MicroAdjust to use for calibrating Nodal Point for panorama photos. So, while my setup only cost $50, it was only that cheap because of the bits and pieces I already had laying around the studio. Your unit would be about $100 today, versus over $200 for my fancier setup. Oh, and I already had film holders from my Epson flatbed, good for up to 6x12 and 4x5, and an LED lightbox, so I didn't have to buy a dedicated film holder and light source. So, we are running head-to-head on cost. One comment, is that while scanning using a digital camera is convenient and using 'what you got,' I've been comparing results to my old Epson 4870 and, to be honest, the Silverfast controls and scanner produce better and larger files. While the new HiRes features in digital camera with IBIS produce 90mgpxl files, they clump up film grain detail. Otherwise, a 50mgpxl to 100mgpxl camera is required to come up to the 4870, and the V800 Epson blows the 4870 away.
Thank you for the detailed comment. The overall idea for the setup is that it’s very sturdy, easy to build and cheaper than most ready-made copy stands. Another thing I like is that you can upgrade this components in the future. If you are not happy with the resolution you can change camera body or lens. If you are not happy with the height you just get a taller pipe, a better light source etc. Something that cannot do with a conventional scanner, you need to buy a new system. Now as for the Epson comparison, unfortunately I don’t have any experience with these scanners. What I regularly read from others is that it produces really good medium/large format scans but mediocre 35mm scans. What is your experience regarding that? I always let the lab do the scanning but I moved to home scanning a few months ago and have been happy with the results so far.
@@alexandermatragos What Silverfast software allows is total control over your scanner. Using a digital camera, all control is limited to your computer imaging program. I had a 6x7 color negative scanned at a lab who used a Nikon Coolscan, and the detail/sharpness was superior to my Epson Perfection 4870 scanner. Professional reviews show that newer Epson V700-V800 scanners outperform the 4870, and some allow wet scans improving the scan even more. My current tests show the Epson 4870 can be set to produce a sharper, larger image file than even my Pentax 645z (50mgpxl) using the Pentax 120macro. I am still pursuing the camera scanning setup because it will be for 6x12 and 4x5 negatives, which I can zoom in on and photograph in multiple sections to stitch together. That will be the only way to outperform even the modest 4870 scanner. As I commented, I also tried the Olympus IBIS HiRes mode, and while it produces a slightly larger image file than the medium format 645z, the fine film grain detail gets clumped up . . . sacrificing the purity of the original image, and may not show in an actual print, but it is an option to use IBIS HiRes over $$$ 50-100 mgpxl MF digital.
Interesting stuff. I usually drum scan my 4x5 film as I’m not really keen on doing multiple shots and stitching in post. And for the smaller formats I like the results I’m getting so far from the dslr. Though if I were to print big I would send it for a higher res scan.
@@alexandermatragos That pretty much sums it up. The problem with farming out drum scans is you are not assured of color calibration. If the service isn't up to speed with being calibrated to your film stock, then you get less than perfect results. I recall a drum scan done back in the 90's. I took the photo when they cost $75! When I finally had the 4x5 scanned, I found out later the operator only produced a sRGB file. I'm pretty sure the 6x12 and 4x5 scans will come out better on the old 4870 scanner . . . I would love to upgrade to a v800, but that that plus the Silverfast software will be over $2000. Anyway, using new digital cameras to 'scan' film is an interesting experiment, and stitching multiple closeups isn't a problem if you are set up right.
Thank you for the great video - and great idea to use standard black pipe. A good mounting hardware option also for things like small solar panels on a patio etc. However the bit that I could benefit from better detailing is the clamp and tripod head setup for the camera. I wonder if you could elaborate further on that?
I'm still hoping to score a deal on a used copy stand off ebay, but I may build my own like this. I was also intrigued by the holder to keep the viltrox light and essential film holder in place. I don't think you mentioned what it was anywhere. After a bit of searching I found it or something similar on thingverse, and I'm having one 3d printed soon.
The holder for the Viltrox is indeed 3D printed using the design on thingiverse. It’s an easy way to keep it flat, it sits neatly inside so you don’t have to prop it with stuff around your house. As for the copy stand I believe it’s the sturdiest you can get at this price point.
Helpful information, I was wondering the same. Would you guys please share a link? I am very interested in it. One question, does the 3D design include the little mask placed over the light as well?
Absolutely brilliant! I've been exploring a return to film - I have a wonderful Mamiya RZ67 Pro II kit with several lenses that I picked up over a few years. It's a killer medium format camera and the optics are fantastic. BUT, the costs of film + development + scanning + printing made it so prohibitive that I drifted back into digital photography and concentrated on mastering LR and PS. But the itch is still there. Recently, I bought an old Linhof Karden Bi monorail 4x5 camera for $400 with a few Schneider lenses and a Fotodiox adapter for my Canon 5DM4. My hope is to figure out an affordable way to shoot at least B&W - I can develop this at home without a dedicated darkroom. Setting up a copy stand - like what you just built - gets me that much closer to a sustainable work flow. Many thanks! Cheers, mate, J
Happy to hear that! Probably consider a hybrid workflow at first to see how it works for you. Film is indeed expensive but you don’t have to go all in and ditch digital. The RZ is a truly beautiful camera with great lenses. Scanning at home significantly cuts the costs down to about half if you send your rolls to a lab. Now if you develop them at home it gets even cheaper. Hope this helps, have fun shooting :)
Good afternoon, Being passionate about analog photography and thanks to advances in editing programs and digital cameras, the price of supports for scanning negatives such as those from the Kaiser brand always put me off. Thanks to you and your video I decided to build my own copy stand for scanning film. I liked its design so much that I have allowed myself to copy it. Although mine is 28mm thick I also used some 5x25mm screws
I do the same thing just like you but I only use tripod to hold the cam, can you make a video to talk about correcting the film color, that will be fantastic 🎉 thx
Thank you! Yes, this is a holder that helps keep the Viltrox flat. It also makes it faster to set up if you always keep it in the holder. It is indeed 3D printed, you can find the design here: www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
Hey there, have a look at photography equipment stores, you should be able to find it relatively easy. It is a very versatile tool that most studio photographers are using in all kinds of rigs.
To be honest - to me - all those shown copy stands are just enlargers without enlarger heads with extreme prices because “Made in Germany”. Seeing all those Czechoslovakian Meoptas that are built like tanks that could do the same job and hold up for decades. I mean I got my Opemus 6 for free (they go for round 20-40€) with Peterson timer. The head is detachable on universal bolt and you end up with perfect copy stand with micro focusing lever - I only need to figure out the mount for the camera to hook up.
I totally agree, they feel way overpriced to me. That’s what initiated my search for something at a reasonable price that wouldn’t sacrifice stability/sturdiness. An older enlarger can also do the job, and as in your case sometimes you can find them for free.
Thank-you for this. Great prototype totally worthy of emulation! One quick question. You have a stand/base for the Viltrox L116T unit. I've been unable to find such a stand available for purchase online. Where did you get it? [perhaps 3D printed?] TIA for any helpful information you (or other commenters) can share!
Thank you for watching, I’m glad you found it useful! As for the light holder, it is indeed 3D printed. The design is free, you can find it here www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
Hi there, yes, well spotted. That’s a 3D print, I used this design www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165 It’s designed for the viltrox 116 to help keep it flat without the need for propping it with stuff around your house, and it works very well, I’m happy with it.
@@alexandermatragos Hi Alex, loved the video. Been looking for a cheaper alternative and this is it! This light box is cool as well. Ive never had 3D printing done before. Is it just a matter of downloading the Thingiverse file and sending it to 3D printer to build?
Hi Alexander, a great video from you. Everything is clearly understandable, but I can't find where I can buy the 3D model. Do I have to have it printed or is there a specialist shop where I can buy it? I would be very happy to receive an answer from you. Thanks and greetings from Munich Walter
Hi there, thank you for watching and for getting in touch. I made this video to share how I dealt with the problem i faced with copy stands. The lack of variety in the market and the fact that good quality ones cost a significant amount of money. I made the video having in mind that other people could find it to be a helpful resource in case they wanted to do something similar. It is not a product I am selling, it’s only a visual guidance in case you want to do something similar.
Hi Alexander, thanks for your fast answer. Ok, I understand, You don’t bought it, it’s only a tip how it can look like. So I will thinking about and will built a similar. I think I will build it from wood. By an have a nice time. Greetings Walter
@1:28 Where'd you get that mounting bracket for the Viltrox 116T light? I have that same light (multiples, actually) and it'd be nice to have a similar bracket.
@@GregJoughin You are welcome! Actually I probably should add it to the blog post, it’s one of the things I get asked about more frequently. I guess I just omitted it as the focus of this video/blog post is the copy stand and not a full “how to scan” tutorial. But I should somehow mention it. Thanks!
Hi. thanks for this!! I have the Viltrox L116T as well. Where did you get the Viltrox mask for the Essential Film Holder at time 1:31? I also have the EFH. Cheers!
Thank you! The holder for the viltrox is 3D printed. It’s a neat way to keep the light flat. You can find the design here www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
@@bpmj2769I made the whole thing. The holder keeps the light flat and the mask helps with the excess light. I’ve also gaff taped the mask to cover any stray light apart from what I need. I used Fiverr to find someone local to print it for me.
@@alexandermatragos Thanks. I use a battery for the Viltrox, the pictures of the project do not seem to have a cutout for a battery. Does it have a cutout?
@@bpmj2769 Sorry for the late reply. There is a cutout but I don't think the batter fits in there. It looks like it's blocking parts where the battery would be. I'm using the cable for continuous power.
Thank you! The pipe is indeed 70cm and I am comfortably scanning 6x6 and 6x7 with the 100mm macro. I don’t shoot any 6x9 but it is definitely within range. And I have never tried scanning 4x5 but most probably I would need to switch lenses for that, or I would need a taller pipe. Hope this helps!
Absolutely! In fact it’s easier to scan slides as there is no need to do any color inversion. As for lens I would suggest a macro lens between 50mm and 100mm. I personally have the Canon 100mm f2.8 USM macro lens which works great for that purpose.
In my book this is rock solid! But whichever setup you are using, a remote shutter is the wisest choice. I’m shooting tethered through Lightroom and I would generally recommend to shoot remotely to avoid vibrations.
@@alexandermatragos Thanks for the reply. I currently use a tripod but the problem with that is that it moves a lot even when I walk around it (my floor is not very rigid lol). So I'm looking for ways to make something super sturdy that I won't need to set up each time, this method looks promising!
In that case you will see a massive improvement both in setup time and lack of vibrations. A tabletop solution will eliminate the vibrations from the floor. And it really is rock solid, it was one of my main reasons for going that route. I didn’t want to sacrifice stability and that’s what I love about this design. It’s cheap but not flimsy. You can built tables or anything you like from these materials. If you have money to spare, I’m sure the negative supply stands and other expensive options will be sturdy as well and probably quicker at switching between 35mm and 120. But they cost nearly $600 at the top end. Not $100.
Are you getting any-- and I mean *ANY* issues with vignetting/ reverse vignetting with this setup? The Valoi Easy35 has given me nothing but problems so far (can't get rid of the orange corners on any scan I do)... Exploring a copy-stand setup now where I can have more control, and am thinking about literally copying yours... Really looking to find a setup that gives me nice black borders on my scans, even illumination, etc.
I haven’t used the Valoi Easy35, so I don’t really understand why it gives you vignetting. You think it’s coming from uneven illumination? Could it possibly be the lens. I don’t have any issues with the setup I’m using. And even if I had I could work on it. The valoi you are using doesn’t give any leeway. But it’s weird that it gives you vignetting. Did you try to email them? See if they have any suggestions?
@@alexandermatragos Lens is Sigma 70mm 2.8. It's not the lens. Yeah they sent a second unit that they claim they had improved but same issues are present. It's a totally contained black 'pipe' essentially, so it could also be the light falling off on the edges due to that, and like you said, it's a fixed design.
@@alexandermatragos after you photograph the negative film, u must have transfer to PC, what is the name of the app to show the result? Is it can be edited too?
@@thecinematown I’m using Lightroom in order to both capture the image and start the editing process. Inside Lightroom im using a plug-in called Negative Lab Pro to handle the conversion of the negatives and start the editing process. Both of them are not free. But you don’t need Lightroom to open the images, there are tons of software, I’m pretty sure you can find something that doesn’t require payment.
As I briefly touched on the video, conventional flat bed scanners and other film scanners meant for home use have been outdated. There are limited options, mostly of used older designs. The other dedicated film scanners that most labs still use today have the size of furniture, cost quite a lot of money, run on old computer software and all that combined with the problem of maintenance not being easy as these are outdated machines. On the other hand DSLRs have made major leaps in image quality and usability and combined with a decent light set up and film holder can produce very good results. Top that with the fact that they have many other uses and don’t serve the owner solely as film scanner and you can see why everyone is choosing cameras vs scanners.
Using a digital camera to scan film destroys the purpose of using film, in the first place. It would be a whole lot easier to use the digital camera to take the original picture. Either way the final image is only be as good as the digital system you have. Also, you will save a lot of steps, and money.
Well the image on the film needs to be either scanned or printed if you want to see it, so you have to pick one. Unless your are shooting color reversal which can be enjoyed by itself. Most people, including me, don’t have the space for a darkroom in order to do an analog print and that’s the reason that scanning film digitally is the most popular option.
@@alexandermatragos A digital camera is not a scanner. You are only using a film camera and film so you can take pictures of the negatives with a digital camera. The results are not as good as using the negatives for prints, or using the digital camera from the start.
@@johnirby493I would argue that the results from dslr scanning (the term is used loosely, I understand that a camera doesn’t operate as a scanner) are very comparable if not better to a majority of scanners. I have been regularly scanning my work at labs that use frontier and noritsu scanners and recently I started scanning at home and I have seen an improvement in the control I have from doing it myself. A big exception of course are the drum scanners which I normally use on my 4x5 work as they offer incomparable resolution and tonality. It is indeed a pity though that it’s not easy to have a home darkroom.
@@alexandermatragos What I was getting at was that unless you're copying old negatives, it is better to use a digital camera as a camera to take photos with than as a copy machine to copy negatives. Try taking the same photos with digital and film cameras, develop the negatives, then "scan" the negatives and see whether the scan or the digital photos are better..
@@johnirby493To be honest I don’t really see the point of this comparison. Analog looks vastly different than digital wether you print it in darkroom, scan it or just look at it on a light table. I don’t really understand in what terms are you trying to compare it. If digital looks “better” to you then by all means don’t bother shooting film. For me each system has it’s place and I love the options I have with analog cameras. There are photos i take with my 4x5 that I would never bother taking with a 35mm. And vice versa, I shoot still life images on digital that has great flexibility and allows for different post processing techniques that I would never bother shooting on film. So a straight up comparison between a dslr image and the film “scan” that was taken with the very same dslr doesn’t really make sense to me.
Thank you so much! Saved everyone $500! I don't use an LED panel, but rather a portable flash, which eliminates the possibility of vibration during exposure. Most decent modern flashes have variable output, which is useful especially for really dense negatives. I use an old Canon 580 ex ii with an old ST-E2 infrared trigger. The way it's set up is I built a wood box, painted it white inside, and then put a sheet of white plexiglass on top. It's built with doors on one side so that I can place my flash inside. Here's my very amateurish video showing my set up. I shoot tethered, using Canon EOS utility, Canon Photo Professional, Lightroom and the NegativeLabPro conversion software. ruclips.net/video/W1QYYTA_mnE/видео.htmlsi=xU29LFqyAMEqxgMt
Nice work man! I remember myself back in 2016 trying to digitise film with big studio flashes and white plexi sheets in a very awkward and time consuming way. Thankfully the more people that get into this the more solutions we come up with collectively and everyone adds a piece. DSLR “scanning” has gone a long way to the point that it is fast with very good results. I like your set up!
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for making a nice 4 minute video and not a 16 minute art film !
Thank you for thinking- then sharing the concept and solutions. This is RUclips at its best😊
🙏🏻 Much appreciated!!
Ebay is full of cheap tripod heads- maybe not the most fun to adjust, but, if you leave it on a stand like this, you'll only have to adjust it once!
For sure! You don’t have to go with the manfrotto, as long as it’s sturdy enough to hold your camera. I’m using a lot of their products and happened to have a few things laying around, but there are many products out there. The used market is also interesting since many of these products are tough enough to last a lifetime.
You just reminded me that I have an old, very solid Manfrotto tripod head sitting on the shelf that hasn’t been used in 10 years. Perfect project for it.
i used to dslr scan with a tripod but eventually bought a stand. the film holder is partly my own creation. a combination of a film scanner film holder and a rail i built myself. i find the dslr scanning fast and accurate. however, i don't intend shooting films anymore. i have a ton of old negatives and slides that i shoot prior to the digital era that need to get digitized.
Excellent presentation very inspiring to go out and build your own !
Thanks, I appreciate it!
Nice work - your stand looks a great. And thanks for the closeup on my reddit comment - glad to know it was useful!
Thank you!! As soon as I read it I was like “that’s it!”. So simple and easy to make yet sturdy and it looks good.
Great work Alexander, this will help many people. Beautifully made stand (and video!)
Thank you Hashem!!!
Thanks for posting. I went a similar route, although instead of a pipe and flange, I used a £2.50 black table leg from IKEA which I mounted from beneath the ply board (12" x 15") and protruding upward through a suitable diameter hole (40mm) for a clean surface appearance. I also covered the base with a neoprene mat to protect the surface I used the stand on.
To ensure the camera axis remained parallel to the table leg and was easy to reposition vertically to cater for different media, I employed a 30cm arca swiss rail secured to the table leg with a pipe clamp at each end and then used a back to back arca swiss clamp to attach the camera to the rail.
The other advantage of this approach was that the leg (optionally with fittings) can easily be unscrewed from the base for storage convenience.
Total cost inc taxes and shipping £32.50 (crab claw clamp x2 £8.54, Bexin QR-50B double sided arca swiss clamp £14.44, PU-300 arca swiss 30cm rail £7 - all from AliExpress, except the off-cut of ply which I got from a friend for free and the £2.50 table leg from IKEA . lol)
That sounds very interesting! Thank you for sharing. I would love to see photos of it, feel free to drop me an email.
@@alexandermatragos I'm not sure where to find your address as it's not in your about section, so I've guessed you're on gmail.
@@mosfear I received your email! Great stuff, thank you for sharing, very nice approach. I like the arca rail as well, makes it easier for slight adjustments. (Also I will update RUclips to add my email, thanks)
Well now, I'm impressed. Looks awesome and very clean. Now I have a weekend project...
Wonderful video and exactly what I was looking for. Made something very very similar for my needs and saved a bunch. Thank you
Thats awesome ALEX!! I use my Manfrotto Tripod as it can go horizontal. I level the lens X & Y in a few seconds and get the correct height. I use my 5D III with a EF24-105 f4L with extension tubes so I can get really close. I have a new light table/box and I hand made my own film holder from card stock, sheet plastic, & felt. I made it to hold both 35mm and 120 medium format in 2 cutouts side by side. I also lettered it and made cleaves for either side as I shoot 1 format at a time. It works very well and keeps the film flat and level. Keep up the great ingenuity!
Thank you!! You have done a lot of work, I would be interested to see your custom film holders. The tripod is definitely a good option and one that many people may already have at home. I too have a manfrotto one that goes horizontal but I wanted something permanent that I would use only for film scanning without the need to set up every time.
Do you place yours on a table for easier reach or do you do it on the ground?
I have an enlarger (Don-111, cost me an equiv. of $25). For scanning film I remove it’s head, which is quite easy, and place on it’s mount a crab clamp with a magic arm on. I find it more convenient than the simpler setup shown in a video, since I have a height adjustment knob which makes focus and framing adjustment simpler.
Also, quite critically, you need to either eliminate all lighting in the room, or, like I did, use something like a tube between the lens and the film holder - this eliminates stray reflections on the film that may spoil your scans.
Nice, the height adjustment sounds convenient. It would be a bit faster to switch from 35mm to 120. Focusing is quite easy with the live view and as I shoot tethered I can judge the results on the big screen immediately. As for the light in the room, I have a single window, so it is easy to block and I too have added a tube in my workflow to remove any excess light coming from the film holder.
I have a copy stand from my film days and film holders from an old scanner.So thanks for jaring my brain. Best to you and yours.
Sound like you are almost ready to go ;)
I built almost the same copy stand about three years ago. 2 foot long 1.5" pipe and flange mounted to an old, thick wooden cutting board. Mounting clamp attached to pipe, then tripod head attached to mounting clamp. It was rock solid. As I was only going to photo scan B&W 4x5's, color temp and full spectrum weren't important, so I used a light box I built as the light source for reviewing slides and negatives over 30 years ago. It worked great. Disassembled the copy stand at completion but kept all parts in case I ever want to do more photo scanning. It all goes back together in about 5 minutes.
That’s great! It’s a very good solution. Easy to assemble, cheap but rock solid. The parts are easy to source and you can upgrade any component if you ever need to. Unlike conventional scanners where you are stuck with what you have.
Lovely video and dare I say a beautiful bespoke Copy Stand. 😊 You have given me some ideas!
Great job.
Thank you Very much for a good video.
You are very welcome! 🙏🏻
Great idea! I'll give it a try.
Great job, thank you
Amazing, I love you
WOW..thank you so much for this video and additional details of items you used.
You are very welcome! Glad you found it useful.
I lucked out years ago; purchased a Kaiser copy stand from eBay, like new, for $125. It's been working fine for me with a standard little 4x5 daylight balanced lightbox. I use a piece of anti-Newton ring glass to hold the negs flat on the 4x5 plexi top of the lightbox. I tape the glass, about the size of a 120 negative strip, along the long edge to the top of the light source. I've made super sharp images from 35mm b&w and color negs as well as medium format negatives of various sizes. I used a Nikon Z7 with the 50 macro lens. Having a flip up screen with touch focus made it very easy. I used some black paper to cover the remaining area of the lightbox to avoid flare. It might be overkill for most people but I really liked getting 45mp digital images from all my old negs. I was able to digitize all of my negs in about 40 hours. I could shoot about 150-200 images in an hour or two each evening. I have a flatbed Canon scanner, and the quality of the scans for medium format were a little better using the Canon scanner. Between the ANR glass and a thin sheet of plastic diffusion plastic (like tracing paper) I think I was getting better tonal range. Canoscan software feels preferable to Epson 4990 software. I really liked your copystand with cutting sheet for alignment. I think it's every bit as good as the Kaiser stand. Thank you for this video.
Sounds like a nice setup you have there! 45mp can be quite much for all photos, but then again if you have the space for it then no harm having some extra resolution. As for the canon scanner, I haven’t seen any scans from it, I would be interested to see how it performs against you camera setup. Thank you for watching and commenting!
You are amazing!! Thank you so much for this! :)
this is what I have but with a smaller tripod head and its been working for me for about 2 years.
That’s great to hear, it’s a very sturdy solution. And I like that you can upgrade parts of it if you ever feel the need to.
This is raad - thanks for sharing!
🙏🏻 Many thanks!
Upvote for that roll of TP!
This is fantastic, going to give it a shot. Thank you
Such a great video, I've been frustrated with the cost of home scanning equipment and this is a very easy solution. I've just purchased everything I needed (Pipe + Flange, Manfrotto Super Clamp (+ 3/8" pin), Film Holder (+ 6x6 mask), Ball tripod head) for a total of £167 which is the cost of a prebuilt copy stand alone. I already have a light source and plywood which would have added another £40-50 however which is worth noting if anyone is planning to build this in 2024.
Thank you for sharing!
Nice to hear! I hope you get a good use out of it. It’s still one of the sturdiest and cheapest solutions out there. And I love the modularity of the whole dslr scanning process. Every part is easily upgradable, unlike flatbed or other dedicated film scanners. And once you are done with the upfront costs you will not have to worry for anything else. You can send me a photo as well, I’d be happy to see it once you complete it. Thank you for watching!
@alexandermatragos absolutely, modularity is great! I'll be sure to send you a photo in a couple of week once all the components arrive!
You gave me hope !!!! Fantastic IDEA 👌
thanks mate, all i needed.
Brilliant!!! 🙂
brilliant, thanks a bunch for this!
You're very welcome!!
Outstanding!!!!!!!!!
Hi,
Your setup looks neat and very workable to me. I went slightly differently: I bought an old and worn-out Magnifaks enlarger, took off the lamp housing and installed a tripod head. It worked fine too. For the light source, I am using a mixing chamber made out of a wooden box and styrofoam lining, with an old reliable Sunpak 383 flash at 90 degrees angle to the diffusion opening. F-stop 11-16 at 1/16th power. As a modeling light, I glued to the bottom of the mixing chamber a small LED bare light which has a separate switch. This setup works well for me.
That’s nice to hear, and creative as well! I would like to see a photo, to get a better idea of how it looks like.
Thank you for this. Im using this in addition to an Epson v600 to scan 35mm. This was just the nudge I needed to assemble 1” thick 30” length pipe/flange/1” plywood for myself. Mounted super clamp/kirk bh3/5d mark ii/180mm L with long plate. Even with .5m working distance, it seems plenty stable enough for my use.
this was very useful.
thanks
You are welcome!
been looking for a cheap and effective set up to build, thanks!!
No problem, happy to help!
Very simple and very nice indeed! Thanks a lot for the tip :-)
Wel, I'm gonna do the freakin' same thing.
For the metal pole itself, I'm using a metal table leg. It comes with the mount.
Great vid!
Thanks! Send photos, I’d like to see the finished design! I hope it works out great for you.
bravo !!
I built something very similiar around the same time you released this video, based on a few different designs I saw on reddit and RUclips. I used a pre-finished, large wood cutting board for a base and raw iron pipe which looks very nice and rustic to me. I'm using the same super clamp but a cheap ball head which is aggravating to adjust so I like to get something better like you have. I'd like to work a macro focusing rail into it as well for precise camera movements.
Nice! Yeah a macro focusing rail would make the process more finessed. I wonder if they are long enough to allow switching from 35mm distance to 120 without the need to move the whole head up and down.
@@alexandermatragos I've seen them long enough for that but they are pricy. With my micro-nikkor 55/3.5 I've been able to scan 35mm, 120, and 4x5 from the same height by switching extension tubes, and I sort of use the arca swiss mount to get a little bit of precision movement without moving the clamp. I've ordered a Canon macro 100/2.8L I'm excited to try though. Focusing and framing with the nikkor is a pain.
@@brendonwilson1318 The Canon is a great lens. I’m using the non L version which is just as good optically. I’m very pleased with it.
I used 1 1/4" pipe and flange, and all the rest were things found around the studio. The pipes were $35 and $12 for a 3/8ths" tap set . . . $7 for odd screws, bolt, and nut.
Like you, I had a spare tripod head which I attached to the top (nipple) using the tap, and had an old Manfrotto Art. 3419 (now #454) microadjust sliding mount for fine tuning the vertical ($150).
Your use of the Super Clamp is a $40 option, which I like . . . and I can return the MicroAdjust to use for calibrating Nodal Point for panorama photos.
So, while my setup only cost $50, it was only that cheap because of the bits and pieces I already had laying around the studio.
Your unit would be about $100 today, versus over $200 for my fancier setup.
Oh, and I already had film holders from my Epson flatbed, good for up to 6x12 and 4x5, and an LED lightbox, so I didn't have to buy a dedicated film holder and light source. So, we are running head-to-head on cost.
One comment, is that while scanning using a digital camera is convenient and using 'what you got,' I've been comparing results to my old Epson 4870 and, to be honest, the Silverfast controls and scanner produce better and larger files. While the new HiRes features in digital camera with IBIS produce 90mgpxl files, they clump up film grain detail. Otherwise, a 50mgpxl to 100mgpxl camera is required to come up to the 4870, and the V800 Epson blows the 4870 away.
Thank you for the detailed comment. The overall idea for the setup is that it’s very sturdy, easy to build and cheaper than most ready-made copy stands.
Another thing I like is that you can upgrade this components in the future. If you are not happy with the resolution you can change camera body or lens. If you are not happy with the height you just get a taller pipe, a better light source etc. Something that cannot do with a conventional scanner, you need to buy a new system.
Now as for the Epson comparison, unfortunately I don’t have any experience with these scanners. What I regularly read from others is that it produces really good medium/large format scans but mediocre 35mm scans. What is your experience regarding that?
I always let the lab do the scanning but I moved to home scanning a few months ago and have been happy with the results so far.
@@alexandermatragos What Silverfast software allows is total control over your scanner. Using a digital camera, all control is limited to your computer imaging program.
I had a 6x7 color negative scanned at a lab who used a Nikon Coolscan, and the detail/sharpness was superior to my Epson Perfection 4870 scanner. Professional reviews show that newer Epson V700-V800 scanners outperform the 4870, and some allow wet scans improving the scan even more.
My current tests show the Epson 4870 can be set to produce a sharper, larger image file than even my Pentax 645z (50mgpxl) using the Pentax 120macro.
I am still pursuing the camera scanning setup because it will be for 6x12 and 4x5 negatives, which I can zoom in on and photograph in multiple sections to stitch together. That will be the only way to outperform even the modest 4870 scanner.
As I commented, I also tried the Olympus IBIS HiRes mode, and while it produces a slightly larger image file than the medium format 645z, the fine film grain detail gets clumped up . . . sacrificing the purity of the original image, and may not show in an actual print, but it is an option to use IBIS HiRes over $$$ 50-100 mgpxl MF digital.
Interesting stuff. I usually drum scan my 4x5 film as I’m not really keen on doing multiple shots and stitching in post. And for the smaller formats I like the results I’m getting so far from the dslr. Though if I were to print big I would send it for a higher res scan.
@@alexandermatragos That pretty much sums it up. The problem with farming out drum scans is you are not assured of color calibration. If the service isn't up to speed with being calibrated to your film stock, then you get less than perfect results.
I recall a drum scan done back in the 90's. I took the photo when they cost $75! When I finally had the 4x5 scanned, I found out later the operator only produced a sRGB file.
I'm pretty sure the 6x12 and 4x5 scans will come out better on the old 4870 scanner . . . I would love to upgrade to a v800, but that that plus the Silverfast software will be over $2000.
Anyway, using new digital cameras to 'scan' film is an interesting experiment, and stitching multiple closeups isn't a problem if you are set up right.
My bad, after going to your blog I see that you do provide better detail. Thank you.
No worries, I’m glad you liked the video :)
Thank you for the great video - and great idea to use standard black pipe. A good mounting hardware option also for things like small solar panels on a patio etc. However the bit that I could benefit from better detailing is the clamp and tripod head setup for the camera. I wonder if you could elaborate further on that?
great video, thanks
Thank you!!
very cool 👏👏
Thank you!
A brilliant idea. What length tube did you use? Thanks.
Thank you! I went for a 70cm tall pipe (about 27 inches).
I'm still hoping to score a deal on a used copy stand off ebay, but I may build my own like this. I was also intrigued by the holder to keep the viltrox light and essential film holder in place. I don't think you mentioned what it was anywhere. After a bit of searching I found it or something similar on thingverse, and I'm having one 3d printed soon.
The holder for the Viltrox is indeed 3D printed using the design on thingiverse. It’s an easy way to keep it flat, it sits neatly inside so you don’t have to prop it with stuff around your house. As for the copy stand I believe it’s the sturdiest you can get at this price point.
Helpful information, I was wondering the same. Would you guys please share a link? I am very interested in it. One question, does the 3D design include the little mask placed over the light as well?
Never mind, I found that you already provided this information in another comment. Thank you for all the info and for this video.
nice
Absolutely brilliant!
I've been exploring a return to film - I have a wonderful Mamiya RZ67 Pro II kit with several lenses that I picked up over a few years. It's a killer medium format camera and the optics are fantastic. BUT, the costs of film + development + scanning + printing made it so prohibitive that I drifted back into digital photography and concentrated on mastering LR and PS.
But the itch is still there. Recently, I bought an old Linhof Karden Bi monorail 4x5 camera for $400 with a few Schneider lenses and a Fotodiox adapter for my Canon 5DM4. My hope is to figure out an affordable way to shoot at least B&W - I can develop this at home without a dedicated darkroom. Setting up a copy stand - like what you just built - gets me that much closer to a sustainable work flow.
Many thanks!
Cheers, mate,
J
Happy to hear that! Probably consider a hybrid workflow at first to see how it works for you. Film is indeed expensive but you don’t have to go all in and ditch digital. The RZ is a truly beautiful camera with great lenses. Scanning at home significantly cuts the costs down to about half if you send your rolls to a lab. Now if you develop them at home it gets even cheaper. Hope this helps, have fun shooting :)
Quick question. Does that pipe have screw thread on it to screw into the flange?
Yes it does, on both ends. Same size as the flange (so for a 1 inch flange you need a 1 inch pipe etc.)
sick stuff
Good afternoon,
Being passionate about analog photography and thanks to advances in editing programs and digital cameras, the price of supports for scanning negatives such as those from the Kaiser brand always put me off.
Thanks to you and your video I decided to build my own copy stand for scanning film.
I liked its design so much that I have allowed myself to copy it. Although mine is 28mm thick I also used some 5x25mm screws
Much appreciated and thank you for sending pictures of your design!!
That was a great video, well done especially for your first one.
Thanks a lot! I appreciate it.
Looks nicer than their overpriced 600. I built mine like yours . Thanks for the great idea .
Thank you!! It totally looks really sleek, especially on the black finish i did. But the most important thing is that it’s rock solid.
Another option might be to adapt a cheap drill press stand.
I think I’ve seen some people do that. It’s probably a good option. I wasn’t ever aware what a drill press stand is.
i saw the video and had the same idea...
Well done! Great product
Great ;)
My man 💗💗💗
I made one exactly like yours but my tripod head won't fit the super clamp threads do they make a bushing or different brass adapter
Personally, I would add a focusing rail (Novoflex, Manfrotto, ...) to make the height adjustment much more user-friendly.
Definitely a good option and something I would look into adding in the future!
What size Super Clamp? Amazon is full of them but I don’t see what’s big enough to clamp on a 1” pipe
I’m using Manfrotto’s super clamp, it is listed on their catalog as “035 Super Clamp”.
I do the same thing just like you but I only use tripod to hold the cam, can you make a video to talk about correcting the film color, that will be fantastic 🎉 thx
Stainless Steel Super Clamp Camera Clamp Mount Monitor 360° Ballhead Magic Arm Double Ball Head Adapter With 1/4"-20 & 3/8"-16 Thread
Great set up! What stand do you use to keep your Viltrox light pad level? It looks like something 3D printed?
Thank you! Yes, this is a holder that helps keep the Viltrox flat. It also makes it faster to set up if you always keep it in the holder. It is indeed 3D printed, you can find the design here: www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
Hello. Which clamp are you using to attach your camera. And does this require and additional camera screw.
I’m using manfrotto’s super clamp which comes with a threaded stud to which you attach the tripod head.
Thank you. I am building this but I don’t have a 3D printer for the viltrox light. Did you print yours? I f not where did you purchase? Thanks again.
Hey there, I don’t have a 3D printer either. I used Fiverr to find a freelancer to do it for me. Have a look, you might find someone around your area.
I'm going to try and make this - thanks! But where do you find a super clamp with a stud?
I guess you can find this at a camera store?
Hey there, have a look at photography equipment stores, you should be able to find it relatively easy. It is a very versatile tool that most studio photographers are using in all kinds of rigs.
To be honest - to me - all those shown copy stands are just enlargers without enlarger heads with extreme prices because “Made in Germany”.
Seeing all those Czechoslovakian Meoptas that are built like tanks that could do the same job and hold up for decades. I mean I got my Opemus 6 for free (they go for round 20-40€) with Peterson timer. The head is detachable on universal bolt and you end up with perfect copy stand with micro focusing lever - I only need to figure out the mount for the camera to hook up.
I totally agree, they feel way overpriced to me. That’s what initiated my search for something at a reasonable price that wouldn’t sacrifice stability/sturdiness. An older enlarger can also do the job, and as in your case sometimes you can find them for free.
Hello, great set up!! Which lens are you using? Are you also adding a tube or magnification lens?
Hey there, I’m using Canon’s 100mm 2.8 USM macro lens, no tubes or other accessories.
Thank-you for this. Great prototype totally worthy of emulation! One quick question. You have a stand/base for the Viltrox L116T unit. I've been unable to find such a stand available for purchase online. Where did you get it? [perhaps 3D printed?] TIA for any helpful information you (or other commenters) can share!
Thank you for watching, I’m glad you found it useful! As for the light holder, it is indeed 3D printed. The design is free, you can find it here www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
Hi. Is the light source placed in a 3d printed box/cradle? If so, could you possibly share where one could get a hold of it. Thanks!
Hi there, yes, well spotted. That’s a 3D print, I used this design www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
It’s designed for the viltrox 116 to help keep it flat without the need for propping it with stuff around your house, and it works very well, I’m happy with it.
@@alexandermatragos Fantastic. Thank you so much!
@@alexandermatragos Hi Alex, loved the video. Been looking for a cheaper alternative and this is it! This light box is cool as well. Ive never had 3D printing done before. Is it just a matter of downloading the Thingiverse file and sending it to 3D printer to build?
@@billmorris3334 Thank you Bill! Yes, that's pretty much it. You can even send them the link to the website as it would be easier for both of you.
Hi Alexander, a great video from you. Everything is clearly understandable, but I can't find where I can buy the 3D model. Do I have to have it printed or is there a specialist shop where I can buy it? I would be very happy to receive an answer from you. Thanks and greetings from Munich Walter
Hi there, thank you for watching and for getting in touch. I made this video to share how I dealt with the problem i faced with copy stands. The lack of variety in the market and the fact that good quality ones cost a significant amount of money. I made the video having in mind that other people could find it to be a helpful resource in case they wanted to do something similar.
It is not a product I am selling, it’s only a visual guidance in case you want to do something similar.
Hi Alexander, thanks for your fast answer. Ok, I understand, You don’t bought it, it’s only a tip how it can look like. So I will thinking about and will built a similar. I think I will build it from wood. By an have a nice time. Greetings Walter
@1:28 Where'd you get that mounting bracket for the Viltrox 116T light? I have that same light (multiples, actually) and it'd be nice to have a similar bracket.
The light holder is 3D printed. The design is free, you can find it here www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
@@alexandermatragos Very nice - thanks for the link. (Might I suggest you add this to the list of Resources on your blog post, too?)
@@GregJoughin You are welcome! Actually I probably should add it to the blog post, it’s one of the things I get asked about more frequently. I guess I just omitted it as the focus of this video/blog post is the copy stand and not a full “how to scan” tutorial. But I should somehow mention it. Thanks!
Nice idea. Which stud are you using?
Thanks, if I’m not mistaken it must be the “Manfrotto 036-38 Lighting Stud”.
Where did you get the bad for light panel from?
If you are referring to the holder, it is 3D printed. You can find the design here www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
Hi. thanks for this!! I have the Viltrox L116T as well. Where did you get the Viltrox mask for the Essential Film Holder at time 1:31? I also have the EFH. Cheers!
Thank you! The holder for the viltrox is 3D printed. It’s a neat way to keep the light flat. You can find the design here www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
@@alexandermatragos Did you just make mask or the whole thing? I'd need to find someone to make it LOL!
@@bpmj2769I made the whole thing. The holder keeps the light flat and the mask helps with the excess light. I’ve also gaff taped the mask to cover any stray light apart from what I need. I used Fiverr to find someone local to print it for me.
@@alexandermatragos Thanks. I use a battery for the Viltrox, the pictures of the project do not seem to have a cutout for a battery. Does it have a cutout?
@@bpmj2769 Sorry for the late reply. There is a cutout but I don't think the batter fits in there. It looks like it's blocking parts where the battery would be. I'm using the cable for continuous power.
Hey alexander, what kind of light source do you use for your EFH?
I’m using the Viltrox L116T.
Your pipe is 70 cm, correct? Will that be enough you think to Scan 6x6 120 negatives? Or should one go for 100 cm or even more?
Great video btw.
Thank you! The pipe is indeed 70cm and I am comfortably scanning 6x6 and 6x7 with the 100mm macro. I don’t shoot any 6x9 but it is definitely within range. And I have never tried scanning 4x5 but most probably I would need to switch lenses for that, or I would need a taller pipe. Hope this helps!
Could this method also be used to scan a color 35 mm slide? If yes, what lens would work best - I assume a 50mm lens.
Absolutely! In fact it’s easier to scan slides as there is no need to do any color inversion. As for lens I would suggest a macro lens between 50mm and 100mm. I personally have the Canon 100mm f2.8 USM macro lens which works great for that purpose.
@@alexandermatragos Thank you very much - I appreciate your reply!
Hello, what is the name of that clamp ?thanks a lot
It’s manfrotto’s super clamp
How rigid is this setup? If you touch/tap the camera, do you see any movement and have to wait for it to settle?
In my book this is rock solid! But whichever setup you are using, a remote shutter is the wisest choice. I’m shooting tethered through Lightroom and I would generally recommend to shoot remotely to avoid vibrations.
@@alexandermatragos Thanks for the reply. I currently use a tripod but the problem with that is that it moves a lot even when I walk around it (my floor is not very rigid lol). So I'm looking for ways to make something super sturdy that I won't need to set up each time, this method looks promising!
In that case you will see a massive improvement both in setup time and lack of vibrations. A tabletop solution will eliminate the vibrations from the floor. And it really is rock solid, it was one of my main reasons for going that route. I didn’t want to sacrifice stability and that’s what I love about this design. It’s cheap but not flimsy. You can built tables or anything you like from these materials. If you have money to spare, I’m sure the negative supply stands and other expensive options will be sturdy as well and probably quicker at switching between 35mm and 120. But they cost nearly $600 at the top end. Not $100.
Where did you find the base stand for the Viltrox 116T?
It is a 3D printed holder that helps keep the Viltrox flat. You can find the design here: www.thingiverse.com/thing:5200165
Are you getting any-- and I mean *ANY* issues with vignetting/ reverse vignetting with this setup? The Valoi Easy35 has given me nothing but problems so far (can't get rid of the orange corners on any scan I do)... Exploring a copy-stand setup now where I can have more control, and am thinking about literally copying yours... Really looking to find a setup that gives me nice black borders on my scans, even illumination, etc.
I haven’t used the Valoi Easy35, so I don’t really understand why it gives you vignetting. You think it’s coming from uneven illumination? Could it possibly be the lens. I don’t have any issues with the setup I’m using. And even if I had I could work on it. The valoi you are using doesn’t give any leeway. But it’s weird that it gives you vignetting. Did you try to email them? See if they have any suggestions?
@@alexandermatragos Lens is Sigma 70mm 2.8. It's not the lens. Yeah they sent a second unit that they claim they had improved but same issues are present. It's a totally contained black 'pipe' essentially, so it could also be the light falling off on the edges due to that, and like you said, it's a fixed design.
How long was the 1 inch steel pipe that you used to build your copy stand?
Just saw this question answered in one of the comments. Thanks for the brilliant design!
Thanks a lot! Anything else you might need, feel free to ask!
What length of pipe is that?
70cm
@@alexandermatragos Thank you! Do you have any contacts for someone to 3D print the light holder?
@SlickLicksWithAlex I used Fiverr to find a local 3D printer.
I'm building one. Let's see how it goes 🤣👍🏼
Send pictures, hope it ends up nice :)
Thank you for your great information..
May I know which windows apps I can use for that?
Anyone can help? I'm hoping it is a freeware apps.
Thank you!
Thank you for watching, which app are you referring to?
@@alexandermatragos after you photograph the negative film, u must have transfer to PC, what is the name of the app to show the result?
Is it can be edited too?
@@thecinematown I’m using Lightroom in order to both capture the image and start the editing process. Inside Lightroom im using a plug-in called Negative Lab Pro to handle the conversion of the negatives and start the editing process. Both of them are not free. But you don’t need Lightroom to open the images, there are tons of software, I’m pretty sure you can find something that doesn’t require payment.
@@alexandermatragos thank you so much for the information...
@@thecinematown You are welcome!
Why do so many people use a digital camera to scan. Aren't there scanners specifically for film?
As I briefly touched on the video, conventional flat bed scanners and other film scanners meant for home use have been outdated. There are limited options, mostly of used older designs. The other dedicated film scanners that most labs still use today have the size of furniture, cost quite a lot of money, run on old computer software and all that combined with the problem of maintenance not being easy as these are outdated machines.
On the other hand DSLRs have made major leaps in image quality and usability and combined with a decent light set up and film holder can produce very good results. Top that with the fact that they have many other uses and don’t serve the owner solely as film scanner and you can see why everyone is choosing cameras vs scanners.
What's the point of shooting film with antiquated, inferior optics only to later digitize it?
Ask Christopher Nolan
Using a digital camera to scan film destroys the purpose of using film, in the first place. It would be a whole lot easier to use the digital camera to take the original picture. Either way the final image is only be as good as the digital system you have. Also, you will save a lot of steps, and money.
Well the image on the film needs to be either scanned or printed if you want to see it, so you have to pick one. Unless your are shooting color reversal which can be enjoyed by itself. Most people, including me, don’t have the space for a darkroom in order to do an analog print and that’s the reason that scanning film digitally is the most popular option.
@@alexandermatragos A digital camera is not a scanner. You are only using a film camera and film so you can take pictures of the negatives with a digital camera. The results are not as good as using the negatives for prints, or using the digital camera from the start.
@@johnirby493I would argue that the results from dslr scanning (the term is used loosely, I understand that a camera doesn’t operate as a scanner) are very comparable if not better to a majority of scanners. I have been regularly scanning my work at labs that use frontier and noritsu scanners and recently I started scanning at home and I have seen an improvement in the control I have from doing it myself. A big exception of course are the drum scanners which I normally use on my 4x5 work as they offer incomparable resolution and tonality. It is indeed a pity though that it’s not easy to have a home darkroom.
@@alexandermatragos What I was getting at was that unless you're copying old negatives, it is better to use a digital camera as a camera to take photos with than as a copy machine to copy negatives.
Try taking the same photos with digital and film cameras, develop the negatives, then "scan" the negatives and see whether the scan or the digital photos are better..
@@johnirby493To be honest I don’t really see the point of this comparison. Analog looks vastly different than digital wether you print it in darkroom, scan it or just look at it on a light table. I don’t really understand in what terms are you trying to compare it. If digital looks “better” to you then by all means don’t bother shooting film. For me each system has it’s place and I love the options I have with analog cameras. There are photos i take with my 4x5 that I would never bother taking with a 35mm. And vice versa, I shoot still life images on digital that has great flexibility and allows for different post processing techniques that I would never bother shooting on film. So a straight up comparison between a dslr image and the film “scan” that was taken with the very same dslr doesn’t really make sense to me.
Thank you so much! Saved everyone $500!
I don't use an LED panel, but rather a portable flash, which eliminates the possibility of vibration during exposure. Most decent modern flashes have variable output, which is useful especially for really dense negatives. I use an old Canon 580 ex ii with an old ST-E2 infrared trigger. The way it's set up is I built a wood box, painted it white inside, and then put a sheet of white plexiglass on top. It's built with doors on one side so that I can place my flash inside.
Here's my very amateurish video showing my set up. I shoot tethered, using Canon EOS utility, Canon Photo Professional, Lightroom and the NegativeLabPro conversion software. ruclips.net/video/W1QYYTA_mnE/видео.htmlsi=xU29LFqyAMEqxgMt
Nice work man! I remember myself back in 2016 trying to digitise film with big studio flashes and white plexi sheets in a very awkward and time consuming way. Thankfully the more people that get into this the more solutions we come up with collectively and everyone adds a piece. DSLR “scanning” has gone a long way to the point that it is fast with very good results. I like your set up!
@@alexandermatragos Agreed, and thank you sir!