Video Chapter Markers: 00:00 - Intro 01:36 - What is EFH, how it works 07:52 - 35mm scan and comparison 06:26 - 120 formats and test scans 13:05 - A note on light sources 16:28 - Xpan and mounted slides 18:37 - My new workflow 21:19 - Pros and Cons 23:13 - Usage Guide 23:31 - Alternative options 27:40 - Conclusion Hope this one helps some people! Thanks, everyone :-) Important links are in the video description, let me know if I forgot any :-)
You are for sure the most helpful RUclips channel related to film. I've just gotten into film recently and your videos have assisted me with starting out and now with scanning at home. I bought a V600 recently but wasn't happy with the results... returned it and ordered things to DSLR scan now. The additional tips with CRI for the light source are really helpful too. Just wanted to say thanks for all the info and keep it up with the awesome channel! Cheers from Canada!!
Hey, I'm really glad the videos were able to help you out, and appreciate the feedback! The home scanning process always involves a bit of a learning curve, so stick with it! 🙂
Fabulous video - thank you for making it. I bought my Essential Film Holder and pinged a few questions to the address on their website and got almost instant reply back - and not just a one-liner a proper detailed explanation. I'd say that's excellent customer management. I'm using a Raleno 116 light - it's almost a perfect fit for the EFH and am delighted with my new set-up. Thanks Hashem!!
I am waiting for my EFH to arrive and trying to decide on light source. Looking at your post I get the impression that the EFH fits on top of the Raleno 116, is that the case, looking at size data the EFH looks to big, can you confirm? A photo would be great!
Good to see the EFH getting some attention. Been using the 35mm without sprockets for a few months and its so much faster than the Lomography holders. Just got the 120 with the guide and no sprockets and it's looking really great from the first few uses. Andrew is also really quick to help out as well with any questions
I found the information and opinions you provided to be very useful. I opted for the Negative Supply film holder, because I know how frustrating and discouraging it can be spending a lot of time on scanning your film/slides. I have done some of my scanning with my Nikon LS 9000 ED film scanner. It does a great job, but it is a slow process. I'm going to try using my Sony A7R IV camera with the new Sigma 105 DG DN Macro lens and the Negative Supply film holder. I also ordered the LED light that you recommended. My scans should go exponentially faster with this new setup. Thank you for taking the time to provide such a great and informative video!
i was originally going to get the digitalliza because i was not a big fan of the EFH, but your point made me change my mind, i didn't even take into account how much contact there was between the film and the holder, that's a no no for me! can't believe i didn't realise this sooner 😂
Yeah that was a definite downside for me! Another problem was when trying to use them in the flatbed, they wouldn't be at the correct focusing height and had to be modified to raise the negative up a bit.
@@pushingfilm oh i see, they definitely look like an elegant solution, but the more i see the same type of holder, the more i see the hassle of using them! Thank you for your video, it definitely helped me making my decision!
I have the Negative Supply 35mm and 120 holders and have found them to be pretty good. Some issues around feeding films straight in the 35mm one, but otherwise excellent. The price, however, is a different problem. Given I have a Nikon Coolscan 9000 (almost dead) and an Plustek Opticfilm 120 (also almost dead), the Negative Supply solution is cheaper than buying those again - and better ultimate quality. I have had the same issue with color due to light source that you have, so thanks for solving that problem for me. I might buy this EFH device and see what it can do for me, one benefit being that it looks a lot lighter than the really heft Negative Supply items and won't break your toe should you drop it. Love the classic Valiant in one of the photos.
Just ordered mine, your review is what convinced me. Seems like the best option on the market right now. Lot of good reviews on it. The guy's website is really informative too
Recently purchased Taiwan's Skier Copy Box III, and it's seems like a good solution with great light and quality metal holders, all in one. It has just a little bit of quirks and the price is acceptable too. However, it doesn't hold the 120 film completely flat. There is a little bit of space between the two plates for the film to be able to pass through. I wonder if it's similar for the Essential Film Holder?
Seems like what's incredibly important but rarely mentioned is how to get flat negatives. When I get C-41 film processed in the lab, it comes back perfectly flat and I have no issues in my Digitaliza. When you have severe curled/cupped negatives like the color film you showed in the Digitaliza, I doubt any holder will hold that flat. Sometimes my B&W negatives processed at home cup, but it's not common. Love this topic. This product looks great.
That's true! A lot of it is inherent to the film stock itself, the base type, how long ago it was manufactured and sitting in a can/roll, then in the camera... and of course what happens during and after processing and drying. The colour rolls you see in the B-roll of this video in the digitaliza were developed by a lab. In my home process results, I definitely see that some film stocks curl and cup more than others! You're right, it's a whole interesting topic in it's own right! :-D
I am very glad that there have been more and more negative feeding products coming out since the lauch of Negative Supply last year. I will definitely wait for another 6 months. There will be more, better and cheaper choices out there.
Such a great complete video. I just found this holder yesterday and was looking for videos of someone reviewing it. Such great timing! Thank you for this thorough review, much appreciated.
The light source comparison was really interesting. You were talking about color changes but what jumped out at me was what looked like glare on the two poorer ones, as if the first two images had been taken with a polarizer at inception. But look again at the seat cushions, even the Viltrox-sourced light does something odd to the seat that's not present in the lab scan. In fact that comparison was the only one where the lab scan looked the best IMO.
Another thing about the negative supply. They recently came out with a 120mm model which is a good thing if you shoot 120 a lot. However, making another separate unit would be impractical to own given with the price of the 35mm unit and having to own both just to digitize both formats.
Thanks for the review Hashem. It's likely one of the best reviews I have seen online about such products. Thanks also for putting some very visibile work into it to share the info with us. That holder seems to be a very good value proposition. There are few points that still puzzle me after that review: - I keep seeing people comparing with Epson scanners without really using the scanners to their full potential. Many of us use ANR glass holders or wet mounts which would mitigate a lot of the issues you mention. That scanner will allow you to scan up to 8x10 (LF people are not being forgotten). You also totally omit the benefit of ICE which is a real time saver for color film. I think someone like Nick Carver gives a good idea of the Epson scanner true potential. Granted it requires more training and better holders. - I think you draw improper conclusions on dynamic range in the video. People really need to understand that it starts with the sensor capabilities of your camera vs your scanner, and recent digital camera do not offer as much dynamic range as scanners (cambridgeincolour.com has a very good article about it). Unless you use calibrated targets there is a good chance no video review like this one will be able to show anything in terms of dynamic range comparison. And judging this after grading the acquired image won't necessarily help. - You highlight few times how good film flatness is but I struggle to see how it's achieved through spacers only. Unless I misunderstood, there is no apparatus to pressure the film and keep it really flat like ANR glass would do or by creating some tension on the film as NS holder seems to do. - The film advance part is very quickly discussed. I understand your point about digitaliza plate creating potential scratches but advancing or pulling the film with fingers is not really the best approach either. By the way, adding a 3rd party anti-static brush could be a nice add-on. - I really like your points about the quality of the light pad. One thing that bugs me is adding another diffusion panel on top on the diffusion panel these pads have. I would also question if that plastic diffuser could not affect the colors coming from a very good CRI light pad. I would be very curious to hear from you about these points as you review is really going in the right direction for me. As a last point it would have been nice to have a visual summarizing the various solutions with features, benefits and price to put everything into perspective. Thanks again for the great video.
Hey thanks Nico! 1- I see what you mean regarding flatbeds. You definitely can get better results with wet mounting and things like ANR glass. But for me, that is way too much hassle and I can't justify the cost. I shoot a fair bit of 35mm and smaller 120 formats. I have seen Nick's videos (he's the best!), and wish I was as conscientious as him and selective with my shots! I still plan to keep my flatbed, as it can be great for things like 6x12 and longer panos, and sheet film etc. I still don't mind it for proof scans on smaller formats. ICE is another nice advantage of actual scanners though, as you mentoned. My main aim in the video was to compare holders 2-My conclusions on dynamic range are something perhaps anecdotal, as I have always seen it in my testing of lab scans vs my Canon 5D IV. I have even personally used Frontier SP scanners, tested comparisons by pulling shadows and highlights from both and the modern camera sensor has a clear edge. The only thing I found better was scanning my own film on a Flextight. So in a practical sense, it's a win for me. Perhaps a lot of it is skewed by the baked in difference from the scanner profiles, contrast, and compression... but again I'm looking at it practically and how it affects my scan+print. 3. In regards to flatness I'm afraid only Andrew would be able to explain the engineering side of it, but I think it has to do with the 0.5mm channel and the fact that it's even on all four corners. Now of course it won't be as flat as a linear flextight scan, drum scan, or even well mounted film on glass... but again for my practical purposes, it's clearly better than other common methods I've used. I even borrowed the betterscan ANR glass for a while and couldn't deal with the time taken (again, volume. I shoot mostly 35mm and 645) and things like Newton rings. It was very frustrating for me personally, but I know it's fine for others. 4- I see what you mean, and an anti static brush could be a good addition! But I still felt better running it through that smooth plastic surface with the emulsion side up, than other methods I've used. 5- Again, my results are anecdotal, and for the technical information I'll have to fall back on Andrew and copy the information from his website: The diffuser is " SPECTRUM OPAL 1TL2 material, which is optimised for white light, and for consistency of light transmission across the entire sheet. The 1TL2 grade transmits 51% of light across the entire spectrum, from below 380nm to above 790nm - that’s the entire visible light range for humans" I'm glad you asked these questions, I know a lot of other people may have had similar curiosities. I hope I was able to shed some light on most if it. I think we can definitely agree that everyone's workflow and needs are going to be different! And therefore ,its great to look into all your options and find what suits you. For me it's an an ongoing journey, and my home scanning process has come a long way since I first tried it in 2013 😂 Thanks for the point about the summary also, and for watching the video! I appreciate the feedback
@@pushingfilm Thanks a lot for the quick feedback. Despite those questions I did not necessarily disagree with your overall opinion. It seems to be a very good value for money product. Maybe he could come at some point with a more elegant advance apparatus and better looking screws but that would not keep me away from considering such product. Maybe getting some distributors would be good for him too to make sure there is more regional support available.
Hey no worries man! didn't take it that way at all :-) It's funny you should say that! I was actually imagining recycling the advance mechanism or rewind spool out of a spare camera, ot even just setting it it to the side while scanning haha... I'm sure something more neat and engineered would be possible though, especially because the design raises it up above the table.
Great great great video, I love that you still put videos out like this, because I think they really help the film community. I'm gonna buy it as soon as I scrounge some money together. Btw, super super professional video, then all of a sudden...."It's like comparing chocolate to shit!" HAHAHA. That was unexpected and hilarious.
Just bought the holder, after seeing some scans on the Negative Lab Pro Facebook group and I see that you upload a review. Weighed a few options and decided to go with this. A lot cheaper than the crazy Negative Supply option.
So glad I found your video! This product looks amazing for scanning my 35mm work primarily. For someone who has researched, researched, researched and spoken to countless professionals including labs, printers and other photographers this product looks very promising. Heck I even bought the product pretty much straight away (which I never do). Very well made video too! thanks, Madhava.
I just use two pieces of museum quality glass to avoid Newton rings. I sandwich the film between the 2 pieces of glass and use a black piece of paper that I have cut in the dimensions of the film as a mask. It's simple, fast, cheap and it holds the film absolutely flat. I use a light table hence my light source is already diffused. I hope this comment will help people out there to save some money and actually make better dslr "scans". Peace ✌️
I've tried a method like this before and although I found it was great for grabbing individual frames, it took much too long for entire rolls (especially 35mm!) How long does it take you to do a whole roll?
@@pushingfilm I guess using a dedicated film holder must be faster but I want my film to be as flat as can be. And I don't think there is a way to make it more flat than using glass. I have even considered wet mounting techniques but these are really time consuming. I scan a 35mm roll in about 30 minutes but I'm so having OCD when it comes to film scanning! I re-check the focus on every picture. I use a 10 sec delay. I meticulously blow away any little particle of dust. I guess that the scan-time would be well into the 10 min ballpark if I was less obsessed with perfection.
@@panagiotistsiverdis fair enough man! Glass is going to be the flattest in a physical sense. I found that I wasn't meticulous enough, and would trap even more dust in there. Sometimes I do multiple 35mm rolls including my partner's! so this method works for me. If I'm needing an even better result for particular frames for a (big) print, only then would i consider the glass sandwich, or simply use flextight by rental at my lab. In terms of cost; buying proper museum or ANR glass, and a good light table that doesn't need diffusion is still a cost, and not that much in a different league. Shooting film is an expensive habit, but luckily there's ways to fit most budgets 😁
@@pushingfilm I totally agree! And the beauty with all creative work and especially with film is that there is not one single best way to do something. Everyone in the end finds the workflow that fits his/her needs and style. I don't develop that much film, maybe 2 rolls per month, so time is not a serious factor in my workflow but I totally get your point of view. Anyway, I just discovered your channel and I'm hooked. Keep up the good work my friend! Greetings from Greece!
Dude amazing video. I didn’t know how much the flatness of your film could affect the result. I’ll definitely keep this in mind going forward. Thanks for the excellent video this was really helpful
So far I use the digitaliza mask and what is quite good except for this dirt that has formed on the edges. Looks exactly like your video. I wonder if you can scratch the film with the EFH because you pull it through 2 plastic plates. is it possible that something like this can happen?
In my testing I didn't notice any scratching (I mean on a micro level, it very well may be happening, as with handling and processing film) But; 1. The plastics are super smooth compared to digitaliza 2. There's no pressure, clamping and potential rubbing 3. The 0.5mm channel that feeds the film is enough space let the film freely run through (I'm yet to find films with a particularly thick base to test. But the gap is adjustable) All in all, I know I impose some dust and scratches with any handling, but this (load shiny side down!) definitely gives me peace of mind.
Hey man, thanks for the video! Your review was actually the reason I ordered the EFH. I have to add though that while the product might be a brilliant tool, I do have some troubles with the support/shipment. To keep it short: Andrew Clifford made a mistake by shipping it to the wrong address and was not willing to correct that mistake. This might not be an issue for people within the UK but something to be aware of if you order from europe or even further away. I know you only review the products but I think it is helpful to have some insight on what happens after you placed your order and what support you can expect.
Hey mate, glad to hear the video was helpful and sorry to hear that happened! I actually had a similar issue when I first got mine (although it was the couriers fault) and Andrew was quite quick to help me in correcting it. I've also had plenty of support in having collaborated on this review etc. It's not that I only review products... but my insight about my specific dealings in this scenario wouldn't really be that helpful, since my situation in receiving the unit as a sample years ago (before the current level of popularity) is very different as a RUclips reviewer, as opposed to someone purchasing the item and going through the normal avenues. For that situation in would be more helpful reading overall reviews of that brand or asking the experiences of people who've recently purchased it.
Thanks for the great review and bringing this new product to our attention. I have been considering the Abdi FC-35/120 and wonder what your thoughts are of that product.
Hey thanks man! Unfortunately I have no knowledge on that product and only just found out about it through your comment! I would have to look into it more before giving my full thoughts. From a quick look though it seems interesting, but I do like that the EFH has the diffuser (which was pretty instrumental in allowing me to use "generic" video lights and getting my results)
These holders looks quite nice for that price. May be i buy one for 120 film when i upgrade to medium format. At the moment i use a glassless filmholder made of polished aluminium from my Kienzle enlarger. Enlarger filmholders can be bought for little money on ebay and they hold the negs very flat too.
@@pushingfilm Not having a macro lens is all that's stopped me so far. Any recommendations for a vintage macro lens to adapt to Canon EF? I know the EF 100 is good (I owned one over a decade ago now) but even used it's quite a lot to spend for a lens I'll only use for digitalising negatives.
I just got my holder and it's really amazing. For anyone who doesn't have a full-frame DSLR and a macro lens, I get really great results with my crop sensor Nikon with 35mm lens using extension tubes I bought off amazon for £20.
I have an APS-C sensor DSLR and just purchased the 55mm Micro-Nikkor 2.8 to use with an extension tube. Pretty set on buying one of these film holders after this video as well 🙂
A fantastic video Hashem and you have a great presentation style. I will be ordering one of the EFH units tomorrow. I purchased NLP last week and the bug has bitten me as I have thousands of 35mm negatives from the early 80s onwards, many developed by myself. I have been using V600 and have had mixed results (and so slow) but after playing with NLP, its full speed ahead. Thanks again (Im in lockdown in Melb as well). Cheers Kevin.
Hey Kevin, Thanks so much mate, I appreciate it! Sounds like you have a lot of work ahead of you there haha.. but I guess this a better time than any for tasks like that, especially for us Melbournians. I have at least 100 rolls that I need to cut and sleeve 😅
I bought the pixl-latr for exactly one use-case: Scanning 4x5. There having the negative lying flat on the "light source" (the diffuser) might be the way to go to keep these large negatives flat. For other formats it is far too complicated to handle efficiently, the EFH should be better for everything smaller than 4x5. [Update: Ordered the EFH, looks like a good solution for my needs!]
Not sure if I'll get a chance to try that, but I feel like they're very different in approach. If I do try the Lomo myself some time, I'll share some comparison points. Karin Majoka recently put out a great video on the new Digitaliza if you're interested though.
Great review! You may have said this and I just missed it, but what temperature and brightness settings are you using with the Viltrox L116T? The colors in the comparison look great!
Thanks Nate! 5600K at 100% yeah I'm loving the latest update man, I especially find the new profiles useful (like the gamma correction one) for tweaking misbehaving colours when you do get them, especially blues.
@@pushingfilm Awesome thanks! And stoked that you are loving the NLP 2.2 beta... just fixing up a few things and then should be ready for everyone soon :)
@@natejohnson6245 I meant to say the Gamut correct profile earlier! (all four seem effective in their own way but I like what that one does to blues and reads on some films) But yeah that's great, I'm looking forward to the next release! (I'm still on 2.1 btw... I should jump on the 2.2 Beta)
@@pushingfilm ha, yeah, I knew what you meant! I've renamed that LUT to just "Natural" so users have a clearer idea of what kind of colors to expect. Huge improvements with curve engine in 2.2 - can't wait to see what you think!
Hi. Great explainer video. Very well done. In your equipment links, you list four different light sources. On looking at them, it appears that a couple of them would have a hard time laying flat on a copy board because of various protrusions on the back. The Raleno and the Kaiser do not seem to have this feature, that I can tell. Could you please comment on this?
Thanks! I have one such light with the protrusions. However, when used with the battery clipped on, it lies flat on the battery, which protrudes past the knobs and switches.
Have you any thoughts on using an Aristo cold light head as your light source? I have one on my 8x10 enlarger (that hasn't seen much use of late) and thought it might make a good light pad.
Wow nice product. Negative supply was always too expensive in my view. I have something similar home made that I use with a durst color copy for digitising negatives. Brilliant machine because it has colour filters for the light and people give them away as no one uses a camera to copy slides anymore.
Thanks - really useful. I have been DSLR scanning film for about 5 years using my old Epson neg holders over a tracing table light with a Nikon D810 - the 120 was troublesome as its hard to get flat. I have ordered a EFH which looks to be just the job. I hope a 5x4 mask is on the way but I can always improvise for that format.
With the light source when scanning color film - If you know the white balance of the light source you are using you can simply adjust your camera's white balance to correct any color shift due to the light source.
It's not that simple I'm afraid! I too thought this for a while, before reading into it and getting information from other people's testing. Besides the actual colour temparature of the light, the source actually has an ability to illuminate colors in your negative differently across the spectrum (in my test they are all white balanced for the film base) There's some really useful information on this in the Negative Lab Pro Facebook group.
Excellent video, really super! The one thing about the design that jumped out at me from the first seconds - why the wing-nuts? I'm no designer but neodymium magnets would so obviously be quicker to lock the mask in place and add to a cleaner design.
Thank you! I don't know for sure (you'd have to ask the designer) But, my thoughts are that with the wingnuts you can adjust the amount of tension to suit different situations. Sometimes there are particular film emulsions that are thicker/denser than others for example, and being able to loosen the plates only slightly would aid in feeding the film.
@@pushingfilm I'm sure you are right. The designer is no idiot and is no doubt aware of neodymium magnets as one type of solution, but maybe inappropriate for this application.
Excellent video thanks. As you said.... simple design but effective and I like the look of the LED light boxes, methinks it's time to put the LED downlight back in the lounge ceiling :-)
Interesting video, to improve even further the Colour output of your scans, use it always on the warmer colour side (3200K if you have a dual colour LED light). This because digital cameras are way better optimised to work with tungsten colour temperature light. Artificial lights have been 3200k for hundreds of years and technology during all this time learnt how to deal with that. Artificial 5500K colour temperature is very recent and even modern sensor can't deal with that so well as tungsten. If then you use a real tungsten bulb as light source you would have the best possible CRI achievable today. Second only to the Sun.
Hey thanks man, this sound like a really useful tip with interesting reasoning behind it. I'm going to try it on the next time I scan and maybe even do a comparison with 5600k :)
Thank you Marco for the lesson. So is all about a balance from warm color light panel and a cooler white balance from our cameras, right? Trying to have a warm light and a WB that compensates to the most "grey", not orange, film scans in DSLR, is that statement right? . Thank you man.
@@juanamievagutierrez9567 Well it's not really like that, it's very complex: Let say we are In a perfect world where artificial lights are perfect. In this case if your light is 3200K and you match your camera WB to the same 3200K you should have the same exact colour rendition you have from the Sun at 5500K. Unfortunately we are not in a perfect world and what I said above never happen in reality. No artificial light as today can arrive at the same colour rendition of the Sun. (which for reference is the perfect light) For perfect colour rendition I mean that any coloured object looks that exact the same tint as they do under the sun light at noon. Some artificial lights can get close, but not as good as the Sun. The closest type of light to the sun for colour rendition is the tungsten bulb (The old bulb that are only 3200K, and they generate lot's of heat.) Any bulb has the same accuracy point and Kelvin temperature. It's a very predictable light since every bulb produce the same result. This is what the human being have used (mainly) for lighting since electricity was discovered (Until led arrived). Tungsten bulb is the second best light source you can use for colour rendition, sun is the first. Today, tungsten bulb are almost disappeared (They need much more power even around 10 times more modern LED, and they generate a lot of heat.) That's why we mainly use LED light for everything today, they vary a lot in Kelvin temps (2500 to 9000 or more) and the colour rendition index (CRI) depends a lot on the quality of the light. The cheep led bulbs are very bad and it's what everyone use at home or office. Colours just look wrong under those lights, with green/yellow/magenta tints. Each colour respond in different ways with those lights, The same Red object for example can appear very different (More orange or more magenta) depending on the quality of the LED light used. And there is notting you can do about it, only be aware of it and use good quality led light. There are LED light that can produce decent CRI close to what the tungsten bulb can give you (But not as good, just close enough). those LED lights are usually very expensive and used only for professional use like photography, cinema production, etc... Having said all of that and knowing that LED lights are so bad in general. If you own a professional led panel with adjustable Kelvin temperature (let say between (3200K and 6500K) you should have the best CRI performance using this light all to the warm side (at 3200K). This because Digital Sensors have been designed for decades to deal with tungsten bulb (which was the most common light available in the past and also for professional use.) And they tend to be better optimised for this colour temperature. Also, LEDs manufacturer tends to do a better job to imitate a tungsten light source than the sun.
Marco Fazio thats great info, but we still have a problem after all the great info you provided, and this is, what LED panel to get? There mustn't be too many choices in the league of what you are suggesting.
@@slimnics I would say a led panel who has a CRI value of 95 or more (there are lot's of other reading value to look for as well but generally a light that arrive at that CRI score is a decent one. I would avoid generic brand or very cheep one and I'll go with the best known on cinema industry. If it's for scanning Film only a small Aputure AL-M9 Amaran at £50 it's a good choice. You need to find a way to diffuse the light evenly but it would be a good "inexpensive" and portable solution. If you are looking for a multi purpose light you would use for photo shooting, lighting products etc... and also for scanning film I would go with a bigger panel. Some brand suggestion ordered by most expensive/better quality to Affordable option/still good colour quality : Lupo, Aputure, Falconeyes, Godox. Look for reviews and compare CRI values. I would go with the highest score you can afford. If you don't have a big budget but you really want the best possible result of scanning film, just find or buy an old halogen incandescence desk lamp and find a way to light your film with that. It's the cheeper option and the best one for final result but it's the worse for practicality because you have to deal with lot's of heat that the light generate and you have to be carful not to burn or damage your film.
@@Zetaphotography Nikon D7200 plus a Macro lens, both of which I already had before I restarted shooting film. These days that is about a $700 combo. Will be upgrading the camera soon because it is about time, and will be upgrading the macro lens because it is an old 105 f/4 Ai-s, not the sharpest or best macro lens
Thanks for the review! The weakest point of this EFH in my opinion is, that it moves much too easily: it stands on 4 plastic knobs and it is light. Especially to scan an entire uncut film, you can’t just advance the film without holding the EFH. Therefore, I have to adjust the frame for every picture.. (!!) What am I doing wrong? How to prevent the slippery EFH from moving on the light source or table..? And besides this, I haven’t found out how to place the light source correctly. How bright should the the light source, a video lamp, be? Full power or less? Distance between light source and diffuser? Distance between. diffuser and film? Anyways, I am really not inexperienced in this field, but somehow it does not work for me so far with the EFH. That’s sad, because I had high expectations.. With the same setup (Sony a7II, Sony Macro 50 f2.8, Kaiser Slimlight Plano, copy stand, negativelpro in LR), but using a film holder that I found on a 3D-print site for free, I get much perfect results, much better than with my Epson V800 and even better than with my Plustek 8200/Silverfast... Any suggestions for the EFH...? I have tested so much gear that I could have bought the negativesupply holder easily..
Hey! Im not too sure to be honest! I just scanned another 2 whole uncut 35mm rolls last night and I didnt have the holder+lightpad move at all. The frame stayed in the exact same spot in my camera's view and I would pull through the film with one hand and trigger the remote shutter with the other. Perhaps its the surface of my light, or it's size. I will do some testing with my larger Neewer light, which has a larger and more slippery surface. I had someone else ask something similar and I imagine if I did have it slip unecessarily i would maybe try a little dab of bluetack on the edge of whatever is slipping and the surface underneath it. But my video light doesnt really move around either when I pull the film... maybe the cutting mat on my desk adds more grip. It's a valid concern and I'll see if I encounter what you're saying as time goes on. As for the light, I use it all full power always, and have it directly under the diffuser of the EFH.
Also, theres a lot of technical information on the "how-to" link in the video description, especially about things like the distances between surfaces etc. You mind find some things helpful on that page too
@@etienneportail5122 No worries man. If you're using the Kaiser (they are super smooth!), it could be worth masking off stray light that goes beyond the diffuser feet with electrical tape, as that will help with scan results and maybe provide a border to prevent slipping at the same time. Otherwise, the Blu-Tak trick would probably be the easiest solution, I'll test it myself some time and see.
Is there a difference between the Raleno and Viltroxi Video lights regarding light brightness, quality of light, costs, and ease of use plugins in or charging up? Great video thanks, FW
Hey Hashem! I really love your channel and your vibe. After this video I decide to buy the EFH. I was also wondering if you could do a video on your workflow from scanning to archives? I always struggle about shorting scanned pictures from different sources and I was wondering how you do it. Keep the good works!
Hey Jean, I really appreciate that. I'm always glad if the videos can help even in some small way. My system for organisation is okay, but not the best. I'm still trying to refine it, as it's gotten me in trouble sometimes trying to find old images. Once I have a good, demonstratable system, (from start to finish), I definitely plan to make a video on the subject!
An incredibly useful video - thank you. I've been looking at the EFH for a while, but your review answered pretty much all my questions - not least the "curly film problem". The only remaining question is how easy is it to load a single negative?
In reference to your light source comparison, how did you use the Viltrox video light as your source since it does not have a flat back? Did you build a frame to hold it horizontal? Do you have any recommendations for light pads/boxes that would give correct color rendition, diffused light, and won't break the bank?
With a battery clipped on the Viltrox lies flat :-) That one, and the rechargeable Raleno unit in the video description are still my recommendations currently... but there are probably a lot more on the market that I don't know about!
Great video, thanks. I just received my EFH after watching your review. It is a great product but I find the only con is that it doesn't guide the film on the sides. Nearly all the 35mm film I scan is in strips and when I first received it I was unable to persuade strips to go through. I had to loosen the screws a bit. I find that every frame as it is pushed through has to be juggled up and down to get it centred, this adds quite a bit of time to the process. Lateral guides would improve the performance. I guess I'll get used to it.
Hey, it should actually have a clear or white guide layer, as with mine in the video footage. Unless you maybe bought the special borders mask, without getting the regular mask?
@@pushingfilm Hi, thanks for replying. I have just had a look and there is a white guide layer but there was a slight bend in the old 35 mm negative strips when I tried to push them through emulsion side up, they were not engaging. I have tightened the wing nuts a bit more and tried again. I find if I insert them shiny side up then they engage and go through without problems, emulsion side up still gives issues. I have captured shiny side to camera before and had no problems (and you don't have to flip images afterwards) So I may just do that. Thanks, I have subscribed to your site.
@@pushingfilm A few thoughts, man: 1. Just ordered the Basic 35 by Negative Supply, and on the way I found out so many other holders for a similar 79$ price point. Say, the Digitaliza+ or FSCPRO v2 by LameraKraft (so weird). It is indeed hard to decide what's good and if, say, that Negative Supply 35 holder has enough distance away from the light source? (i had the idea of placing the diffuser from pixl late below it), or if there's too much room for the film inside the holder to move- then your framing will suffer variation (heard it may happen on the Essential Holder). There's a lot of undiscussed gray area, that's what I'm saying. 2. The main thing that gave me an indication on what to go for was if it's made of a solid material (+plus portability). The Essential film holder (same price point as well) looks flimsy so I was worried it would move with every touch of film advancement, yet I bet it makes up with it's height distance+diffusion. I'd be worried traveling with it, though, cause it may break. And I wonder if thise wing nuts needed recalibration to make sure the plates are always leveled if you take it apart and build it again (,or just switch between 35 & 120).
Thanks a lot for your thoughts. I just received my EFH a week ago and maybe I will find some time on the weekend for first tests. Up to now I used a Plustek scanner and it worked quite well. But I will try some medium format shooting in the future and that's why I purchased the EFH. A question about Negative Lab Pro: Are you only using it for color negatives, or for b/w, too? Does it make sense to get Negative Lab Pro for someone like me who mostly shoots b/w? Thanks, all the best from Switzerland and take care.
Ive been scanning negs with my Nikon D810 / D 850 for years with a holder I built my self in 2017 that looks very similar to this one. I guess I should have made a business out of it. I would 100% recommend using flash when scanning, its far more powerful and better then any continuous light. I have a made my diffusion box based on a Durst / LPL Darkroom Enlarger mixing box, that's the ultimate even light. Forget these LED light tables.
Have been watching this video 3 times now and I'm really thinking about ditching my Epson flatbad in exchange for this. Question, do you use the 100mm canon marco? And what color profile do you use on the images that you import in Lightroom? For Canon, my images normally come in with Canon Standard color profile, but my guess is that you have to use the NLP profiles?
I know how you feel! I bit the bullet and just sold my V800. I use the 100mm Macro L 2.8, and yeah I have definitely been using the NLP camera profiles! Outside of scanning I usually use the Adobe standard profile or other ones such as "film" presets etc.
@@pushingfilm Thanks for your reply! Already ordered the EFH so i guess my flatbed scanner will be on ebay soon... ;)
3 года назад+1
Great video ! 2 questions, 1) what would be the best light source in the list you mention, or another one small better one if you know, that would not exceed a few hundred bucks ? 1) what DSLR resolution would you recommend to get the best out of 35 mm pos and negs, without maybe cranking up the full 45MP of my new R5. I have only 35 mm and I just ordered the EFH. Thanks
Hey Arnaud. I definitely recommend the L116T for it's cost, size, and the results I get in terms of scans. Anything smaller than this may not sit nicely under the EFH. As for resolution, I would always recommend going with the highest resolution your camera is capable of (if hard drive space isn't an issue) in case you need it later. But given what you said, 20-30MP is still way more than enough for 35mm if using a macro lens and filling the frame/sensor. Having the extra MP would only be useful for cropping in, or printing big.
3 года назад
@@pushingfilm Just ordered that panel ! Thanks a lot, can't wait to start scanning, I found myself a good second hand kaiser stand as well.
3 года назад
Hello again, just got the L116T. 2 questions : how to you make it hold flat and stable with the EFH on top ? And, as the color temp is 5000K and cannot be ajusted to 6500K (the max is 5600 apparently), how do you integrate this in a D65 workflow and get accurate white bal ? THANKS !
Fantastic video as always, thanks for you thoughtful review! Have you ever considered using an off-camera flash for illuminating your scans? I understand that strobes have a cri rating of 100. Flash also allows for a high shutter speed and high aperture without having to run a high wattage light source. I’m considering replacing my cheap eBay light panel with a flash in a box below the film holder.
I have tried this approach. Although off-camera flash is powerful and daylight balanced, the main problem is that it's non-continuous. This makes it difficult to focus and frame accurately, especially when the depth of focus is so narrow. You can get around this problem by rigging a focus preview light, but in my experience it's simpler to use a bright, continuous, even, daylight-balanced light source to begin with.
I just received my Mixlator but have yet to try it out. I need to get a good lightbox or video light before I can test things. It looks like a good product though.
Great video, Hashem. I'm wondering how you keep the Viltrox L116T level when you put the EFH unit on top to scan? I was thinking maybe leave it in the box to keep it stable and level, but I think with the battery pack in place, it probably wouldn't fit. Any advice most appreciated! Cheers, Doug.
I will be interested in this product as my Nikon Coolscan LS 50 is getting old now but, in your comparison the file used from the lab was a JPG and the one from the DSLR a TIFF. JPG looses a lot of information and bit depth due to compression compared to TIFF. It would have been better if both files were of the same type.
I will second everything you have said in this video! Since the mid-1970s, I've spent a lot of time copying film (and prints and art and a little of everything else). At one point, I had thousands of dollars' worth of tools at work that I used to do that. Now I'm retired. For the last few years, I've used a home brew setup made from junk in my closet, including old Omega B22 enlarger negative carriers and a slide holder fashioned from popsicle sticks and cardboard! An old iPhone with a "blank" JPEG displayed was my light source. It worked fine, but slowly. I saw your video several months ago, ordered the Viltrox light and the EFH 35mm negative/120 film/35mm slide mask setup, and have started digitizing my film collection from my youth. BUT, I have one big question: What are you doing to hold the light and the EFH absolutely still under the camera? They are light weight and slippery. The EFH slides all over the light at the slightest touch. For efficiency, I want to set up the camera-to-EFH alignment once, then work for hours without changing it. I just want to work through hundreds of slides and negatives as quickly as possible. So far, I've found I have to realign the holder in the viewfinder for every copy. Then I have to do the same thing in Lightroom Classic. I want to be able to apply the same exact crop to every frame, making full frame proofs without having to visit the crop tool in LrC until I do a final photofinishing job.
Hi William! I addressed a bit more on how I use the EFH in a newer video on the channel, including the issue you mentioned of the feet slipping, and how I keep frames in the same alignment. Its a newer one on the channel called "Batch Scanning Film..." and hopefully it will help!
Hi Hashem, great review! 0:14 into the video the EFH is put on top of a light source, is that the Viltrox L116T? Does the EFH fit within the frame of the Viltrox? Thanks.
Video Chapter Markers:
00:00 - Intro
01:36 - What is EFH, how it works
07:52 - 35mm scan and comparison
06:26 - 120 formats and test scans
13:05 - A note on light sources
16:28 - Xpan and mounted slides
18:37 - My new workflow
21:19 - Pros and Cons
23:13 - Usage Guide
23:31 - Alternative options
27:40 - Conclusion
Hope this one helps some people! Thanks, everyone :-) Important links are in the video description, let me know if I forgot any :-)
You are for sure the most helpful RUclips channel related to film. I've just gotten into film recently and your videos have assisted me with starting out and now with scanning at home. I bought a V600 recently but wasn't happy with the results... returned it and ordered things to DSLR scan now. The additional tips with CRI for the light source are really helpful too. Just wanted to say thanks for all the info and keep it up with the awesome channel! Cheers from Canada!!
Hey, I'm really glad the videos were able to help you out, and appreciate the feedback! The home scanning process always involves a bit of a learning curve, so stick with it! 🙂
Can't imagine better review of this product! Thanks!
Glad it helped! 🙂
I've been waiting for a more affordable option to the Negative Supply film holders. Thank you very much sir
Awesome! Glad it helped you
Fabulous video - thank you for making it. I bought my Essential Film Holder and pinged a few questions to the address on their website and got almost instant reply back - and not just a one-liner a proper detailed explanation. I'd say that's excellent customer management. I'm using a Raleno 116 light - it's almost a perfect fit for the EFH and am delighted with my new set-up. Thanks Hashem!!
I am waiting for my EFH to arrive and trying to decide on light source. Looking at your post I get the impression that the EFH fits on top of the Raleno 116, is that the case, looking at size data the EFH looks to big, can you confirm? A photo would be great!
Ordered one the other day, right after seeing this comprehensive review. Exactly what I was looking for...thanks Hashem!
Glad the review could help!
Good to see the EFH getting some attention. Been using the 35mm without sprockets for a few months and its so much faster than the Lomography holders.
Just got the 120 with the guide and no sprockets and it's looking really great from the first few uses.
Andrew is also really quick to help out as well with any questions
Lomo doesnt scan the edges in 120. It was a let down
Bought the kit instantly. Exactly what I've been looking for. Good that I didn't buy something else.
Same! Added to the cart now
Nice man, I'm glad! It's great that us home process people have more options now 😁
Negative Supply is disappointing purely due to price, ill be getting this one due to versatility and price
I found the information and opinions you provided to be very useful. I opted for the Negative Supply film holder, because I know how frustrating and discouraging it can be spending a lot of time on scanning your film/slides. I have done some of my scanning with my Nikon LS 9000 ED film scanner. It does a great job, but it is a slow process. I'm going to try using my Sony A7R IV camera with the new Sigma 105 DG DN Macro lens and the Negative Supply film holder. I also ordered the LED light that you recommended. My scans should go exponentially faster with this new setup. Thank you for taking the time to provide such a great and informative video!
Nice! Sounds like a great setup :-) Glad the video helped
I ordered one took a couple of months to get here. Love it, would like fly over to Scotland to give Andrew a hug.
Easy, tiger. It's only a film holder ;)
But thanks :)
-Andrew
amazing! you beat me to it! picked one up recently looking to see how it goes / put out a video. cheers mate -- you gave me some added confidence 😊
Thanks Ribs! Sounds good, but no more toilet roll? (😁 That was a nice little hack btw). I'll be sure to check out your video when it launches :-)
@@pushingfilm hahaha you know the toilet roll will ALWAYS be there for me if i need it 😂😂😂
i was originally going to get the digitalliza because i was not a big fan of the EFH, but your point made me change my mind, i didn't even take into account how much contact there was between the film and the holder, that's a no no for me! can't believe i didn't realise this sooner 😂
Yeah that was a definite downside for me! Another problem was when trying to use them in the flatbed, they wouldn't be at the correct focusing height and had to be modified to raise the negative up a bit.
@@pushingfilm oh i see, they definitely look like an elegant solution, but the more i see the same type of holder, the more i see the hassle of using them! Thank you for your video, it definitely helped me making my decision!
Please do an updated video of your worflow for scanning film with a DSLR.
I have the Negative Supply 35mm and 120 holders and have found them to be pretty good. Some issues around feeding films straight in the 35mm one, but otherwise excellent. The price, however, is a different problem. Given I have a Nikon Coolscan 9000 (almost dead) and an Plustek Opticfilm 120 (also almost dead), the Negative Supply solution is cheaper than buying those again - and better ultimate quality. I have had the same issue with color due to light source that you have, so thanks for solving that problem for me. I might buy this EFH device and see what it can do for me, one benefit being that it looks a lot lighter than the really heft Negative Supply items and won't break your toe should you drop it. Love the classic Valiant in one of the photos.
Just ordered mine, your review is what convinced me. Seems like the best option on the market right now. Lot of good reviews on it. The guy's website is really informative too
Yes! Heaps of useful info!
Recently purchased Taiwan's Skier Copy Box III, and it's seems like a good solution with great light and quality metal holders, all in one. It has just a little bit of quirks and the price is acceptable too. However, it doesn't hold the 120 film completely flat. There is a little bit of space between the two plates for the film to be able to pass through. I wonder if it's similar for the Essential Film Holder?
Seems like what's incredibly important but rarely mentioned is how to get flat negatives. When I get C-41 film processed in the lab, it comes back perfectly flat and I have no issues in my Digitaliza. When you have severe curled/cupped negatives like the color film you showed in the Digitaliza, I doubt any holder will hold that flat. Sometimes my B&W negatives processed at home cup, but it's not common. Love this topic. This product looks great.
That's true! A lot of it is inherent to the film stock itself, the base type, how long ago it was manufactured and sitting in a can/roll, then in the camera... and of course what happens during and after processing and drying. The colour rolls you see in the B-roll of this video in the digitaliza were developed by a lab. In my home process results, I definitely see that some film stocks curl and cup more than others! You're right, it's a whole interesting topic in it's own right! :-D
I am very glad that there have been more and more negative feeding products coming out since the lauch of Negative Supply last year. I will definitely wait for another 6 months. There will be more, better and cheaper choices out there.
$99 what cheap do you want. There are cardboard solutions for DIY.
Keen to see the new scanning workflow from DSLR to finished scan. This seems better than a flatbed and the cost.
Such a great complete video. I just found this holder yesterday and was looking for videos of someone reviewing it. Such great timing! Thank you for this thorough review, much appreciated.
The light source comparison was really interesting. You were talking about color changes but what jumped out at me was what looked like glare on the two poorer ones, as if the first two images had been taken with a polarizer at inception. But look again at the seat cushions, even the Viltrox-sourced light does something odd to the seat that's not present in the lab scan. In fact that comparison was the only one where the lab scan looked the best IMO.
Another thing about the negative supply. They recently came out with a 120mm model which is a good thing if you shoot 120 a lot. However, making another separate unit would be impractical to own given with the price of the 35mm unit and having to own both just to digitize both formats.
I see what you mean!
Thanks for the review Hashem. It's likely one of the best reviews I have seen online about such products. Thanks also for putting some very visibile work into it to share the info with us. That holder seems to be a very good value proposition. There are few points that still puzzle me after that review:
- I keep seeing people comparing with Epson scanners without really using the scanners to their full potential. Many of us use ANR glass holders or wet mounts which would mitigate a lot of the issues you mention. That scanner will allow you to scan up to 8x10 (LF people are not being forgotten). You also totally omit the benefit of ICE which is a real time saver for color film. I think someone like Nick Carver gives a good idea of the Epson scanner true potential. Granted it requires more training and better holders.
- I think you draw improper conclusions on dynamic range in the video. People really need to understand that it starts with the sensor capabilities of your camera vs your scanner, and recent digital camera do not offer as much dynamic range as scanners (cambridgeincolour.com has a very good article about it). Unless you use calibrated targets there is a good chance no video review like this one will be able to show anything in terms of dynamic range comparison. And judging this after grading the acquired image won't necessarily help.
- You highlight few times how good film flatness is but I struggle to see how it's achieved through spacers only. Unless I misunderstood, there is no apparatus to pressure the film and keep it really flat like ANR glass would do or by creating some tension on the film as NS holder seems to do.
- The film advance part is very quickly discussed. I understand your point about digitaliza plate creating potential scratches but advancing or pulling the film with fingers is not really the best approach either. By the way, adding a 3rd party anti-static brush could be a nice add-on.
- I really like your points about the quality of the light pad. One thing that bugs me is adding another diffusion panel on top on the diffusion panel these pads have. I would also question if that plastic diffuser could not affect the colors coming from a very good CRI light pad.
I would be very curious to hear from you about these points as you review is really going in the right direction for me.
As a last point it would have been nice to have a visual summarizing the various solutions with features, benefits and price to put everything into perspective.
Thanks again for the great video.
Hey thanks Nico!
1- I see what you mean regarding flatbeds. You definitely can get better results with wet mounting and things like ANR glass. But for me, that is way too much hassle and I can't justify the cost. I shoot a fair bit of 35mm and smaller 120 formats. I have seen Nick's videos (he's the best!), and wish I was as conscientious as him and selective with my shots! I still plan to keep my flatbed, as it can be great for things like 6x12 and longer panos, and sheet film etc. I still don't mind it for proof scans on smaller formats. ICE is another nice advantage of actual scanners though, as you mentoned. My main aim in the video was to compare holders
2-My conclusions on dynamic range are something perhaps anecdotal, as I have always seen it in my testing of lab scans vs my Canon 5D IV. I have even personally used Frontier SP scanners, tested comparisons by pulling shadows and highlights from both and the modern camera sensor has a clear edge. The only thing I found better was scanning my own film on a Flextight. So in a practical sense, it's a win for me. Perhaps a lot of it is skewed by the baked in difference from the scanner profiles, contrast, and compression... but again I'm looking at it practically and how it affects my scan+print.
3. In regards to flatness I'm afraid only Andrew would be able to explain the engineering side of it, but I think it has to do with the 0.5mm channel and the fact that it's even on all four corners. Now of course it won't be as flat as a linear flextight scan, drum scan, or even well mounted film on glass... but again for my practical purposes, it's clearly better than other common methods I've used. I even borrowed the betterscan ANR glass for a while and couldn't deal with the time taken (again, volume. I shoot mostly 35mm and 645) and things like Newton rings. It was very frustrating for me personally, but I know it's fine for others.
4- I see what you mean, and an anti static brush could be a good addition! But I still felt better running it through that smooth plastic surface with the emulsion side up, than other methods I've used.
5- Again, my results are anecdotal, and for the technical information I'll have to fall back on Andrew and copy the information from his website: The diffuser is " SPECTRUM OPAL 1TL2 material, which is optimised for white light, and for consistency of light transmission across the entire sheet. The 1TL2 grade transmits 51% of light across the entire spectrum, from below 380nm to above 790nm - that’s the entire visible light range for humans"
I'm glad you asked these questions, I know a lot of other people may have had similar curiosities. I hope I was able to shed some light on most if it. I think we can definitely agree that everyone's workflow and needs are going to be different! And therefore ,its great to look into all your options and find what suits you. For me it's an an ongoing journey, and my home scanning process has come a long way since I first tried it in 2013 😂 Thanks for the point about the summary also, and for watching the video! I appreciate the feedback
@@pushingfilm Thanks a lot for the quick feedback. Despite those questions I did not necessarily disagree with your overall opinion. It seems to be a very good value for money product. Maybe he could come at some point with a more elegant advance apparatus and better looking screws but that would not keep me away from considering such product. Maybe getting some distributors would be good for him too to make sure there is more regional support available.
Hey no worries man! didn't take it that way at all :-) It's funny you should say that! I was actually imagining recycling the advance mechanism or rewind spool out of a spare camera, ot even just setting it it to the side while scanning haha... I'm sure something more neat and engineered would be possible though, especially because the design raises it up above the table.
Fantastic review, I've just ordered one.
Great great great video, I love that you still put videos out like this, because I think they really help the film community. I'm gonna buy it as soon as I scrounge some money together. Btw, super super professional video, then all of a sudden...."It's like comparing chocolate to shit!" HAHAHA. That was unexpected and hilarious.
Hahah yeah I let that one slip and just left it in 😅 Thanks for the support man!
Just bought the holder, after seeing some scans on the Negative Lab Pro Facebook group and I see that you upload a review. Weighed a few options and decided to go with this. A lot cheaper than the crazy Negative Supply option.
That's for sure!
How did you find this! It’s amazing 👏🏼
Thanks for sharing it to us!
I first found out about it after seeing Andrew post his own results in Facebook group! No worries 🙂
So glad I found your video! This product looks amazing for scanning my 35mm work primarily. For someone who has researched, researched, researched and spoken to countless professionals including labs, printers and other photographers this product looks very promising. Heck I even bought the product pretty much straight away (which I never do). Very well made video too! thanks, Madhava.
So glad the video helped! 🙂
Good on you for making this video! The essential film holder looks like the way to go! Cheers from N. California!
I just use two pieces of museum quality glass to avoid Newton rings. I sandwich the film between the 2 pieces of glass and use a black piece of paper that I have cut in the dimensions of the film as a mask. It's simple, fast, cheap and it holds the film absolutely flat. I use a light table hence my light source is already diffused. I hope this comment will help people out there to save some money and actually make better dslr "scans". Peace ✌️
I've tried a method like this before and although I found it was great for grabbing individual frames, it took much too long for entire rolls (especially 35mm!) How long does it take you to do a whole roll?
@@pushingfilm I guess using a dedicated film holder must be faster but I want my film to be as flat as can be. And I don't think there is a way to make it more flat than using glass. I have even considered wet mounting techniques but these are really time consuming. I scan a 35mm roll in about 30 minutes but I'm so having OCD when it comes to film scanning! I re-check the focus on every picture. I use a 10 sec delay. I meticulously blow away any little particle of dust. I guess that the scan-time would be well into the 10 min ballpark if I was less obsessed with perfection.
@@panagiotistsiverdis fair enough man! Glass is going to be the flattest in a physical sense. I found that I wasn't meticulous enough, and would trap even more dust in there. Sometimes I do multiple 35mm rolls including my partner's! so this method works for me. If I'm needing an even better result for particular frames for a (big) print, only then would i consider the glass sandwich, or simply use flextight by rental at my lab. In terms of cost; buying proper museum or ANR glass, and a good light table that doesn't need diffusion is still a cost, and not that much in a different league. Shooting film is an expensive habit, but luckily there's ways to fit most budgets 😁
@@pushingfilm I totally agree! And the beauty with all creative work and especially with film is that there is not one single best way to do something. Everyone in the end finds the workflow that fits his/her needs and style. I don't develop that much film, maybe 2 rolls per month, so time is not a serious factor in my workflow but I totally get your point of view. Anyway, I just discovered your channel and I'm hooked. Keep up the good work my friend! Greetings from Greece!
@@panagiotistsiverdis for sure! And thanks man, I appreciate the support! Can't wait to visit beautiful Greece some day 😁
Dude amazing video. I didn’t know how much the flatness of your film could affect the result. I’ll definitely keep this in mind going forward. Thanks for the excellent video this was really helpful
Thanks!! Glad it helped :-)
Absolutely brilliant video! Thank you so much for the time you put into this! Will surely buy the EFH. Cheers
So far I use the digitaliza mask and what is quite good except for this dirt that has formed on the edges. Looks exactly like your video. I wonder if you can scratch the film with the EFH because you pull it through 2 plastic plates. is it possible that something like this can happen?
In my testing I didn't notice any scratching (I mean on a micro level, it very well may be happening, as with handling and processing film) But; 1. The plastics are super smooth compared to digitaliza 2. There's no pressure, clamping and potential rubbing 3. The 0.5mm channel that feeds the film is enough space let the film freely run through (I'm yet to find films with a particularly thick base to test. But the gap is adjustable) All in all, I know I impose some dust and scratches with any handling, but this (load shiny side down!) definitely gives me peace of mind.
Hey man, thanks for the video! Your review was actually the reason I ordered the EFH. I have to add though that while the product might be a brilliant tool, I do have some troubles with the support/shipment. To keep it short: Andrew Clifford made a mistake by shipping it to the wrong address and was not willing to correct that mistake. This might not be an issue for people within the UK but something to be aware of if you order from europe or even further away. I know you only review the products but I think it is helpful to have some insight on what happens after you placed your order and what support you can expect.
Hey mate, glad to hear the video was helpful and sorry to hear that happened! I actually had a similar issue when I first got mine (although it was the couriers fault) and Andrew was quite quick to help me in correcting it. I've also had plenty of support in having collaborated on this review etc. It's not that I only review products... but my insight about my specific dealings in this scenario wouldn't really be that helpful, since my situation in receiving the unit as a sample years ago (before the current level of popularity) is very different as a RUclips reviewer, as opposed to someone purchasing the item and going through the normal avenues. For that situation in would be more helpful reading overall reviews of that brand or asking the experiences of people who've recently purchased it.
Thanks for the great review and bringing this new product to our attention. I have been considering the Abdi FC-35/120 and wonder what your thoughts are of that product.
Hey thanks man! Unfortunately I have no knowledge on that product and only just found out about it through your comment! I would have to look into it more before giving my full thoughts. From a quick look though it seems interesting, but I do like that the EFH has the diffuser (which was pretty instrumental in allowing me to use "generic" video lights and getting my results)
These holders looks quite nice for that price. May be i buy one for 120 film when i upgrade to medium format.
At the moment i use a glassless filmholder made of polished aluminium from my Kienzle enlarger. Enlarger filmholders can be bought for little money on ebay and they hold the negs very flat too.
Thanks for the really thorough review. I'll definitely keep this product in mind if I decide to get into DSLR scanning.
No worries! thanks for watching, and I hope you enjoy the process if you do go down that route.
@@pushingfilm Not having a macro lens is all that's stopped me so far. Any recommendations for a vintage macro lens to adapt to Canon EF? I know the EF 100 is good (I owned one over a decade ago now) but even used it's quite a lot to spend for a lens I'll only use for digitalising negatives.
I just got my holder and it's really amazing. For anyone who doesn't have a full-frame DSLR and a macro lens, I get really great results with my crop sensor Nikon with 35mm lens using extension tubes I bought off amazon for £20.
Nice! Good to hear you're getting the results you want. It can be quite a jump up in quality and speed compared to other options.
I have an APS-C sensor DSLR and just purchased the 55mm Micro-Nikkor 2.8 to use with an extension tube. Pretty set on buying one of these film holders after this video as well 🙂
This is amazing information! Super helpful and just what I was looking for, I’ll be getting that same holder and light for myself!
Nice! Glad it helped 🙂
Super thorough comparison. Thank you so much for this video!
A fantastic video Hashem and you have a great presentation style. I will be ordering one of the EFH units tomorrow. I purchased NLP last week and the bug has bitten me as I have thousands of 35mm negatives from the early 80s onwards, many developed by myself. I have been using V600 and have had mixed results (and so slow) but after playing with NLP, its full speed ahead. Thanks again (Im in lockdown in Melb as well). Cheers Kevin.
Hey Kevin, Thanks so much mate, I appreciate it! Sounds like you have a lot of work ahead of you there haha.. but I guess this a better time than any for tasks like that, especially for us Melbournians. I have at least 100 rolls that I need to cut and sleeve 😅
This looks interesting. I was going to get the film attachment digitiser by nikon but I'm not sure if it will hold the film flat.
Awsome I just ordered one with the xpan mask
Did you ever put together the full workflow video and if you did could you please put a link to it, as I can't find it? Thanks.
It's nice to see another 35mm slide option.
I bought the pixl-latr for exactly one use-case: Scanning 4x5. There having the negative lying flat on the "light source" (the diffuser) might be the way to go to keep these large negatives flat. For other formats it is far too complicated to handle efficiently, the EFH should be better for everything smaller than 4x5. [Update: Ordered the EFH, looks like a good solution for my needs!]
Perfect timing! Going to buy it. Thanks for the video.
A comparison with digitaliza+ would be interesting
Not sure if I'll get a chance to try that, but I feel like they're very different in approach. If I do try the Lomo myself some time, I'll share some comparison points. Karin Majoka recently put out a great video on the new Digitaliza if you're interested though.
Awesome video Hashem! Thorough as always. I'm keen as to grab one - been waiting for a cheaper and quality alternative to the Negative Supply holders.
Thanks man! Yeah I felt like this filled a gap in the market for a lot of people 👍
Great review! You may have said this and I just missed it, but what temperature and brightness settings are you using with the Viltrox L116T? The colors in the comparison look great!
Thanks Nate! 5600K at 100% yeah I'm loving the latest update man, I especially find the new profiles useful (like the gamma correction one) for tweaking misbehaving colours when you do get them, especially blues.
@@pushingfilm Awesome thanks! And stoked that you are loving the NLP 2.2 beta... just fixing up a few things and then should be ready for everyone soon :)
@@natejohnson6245 I meant to say the Gamut correct profile earlier! (all four seem effective in their own way but I like what that one does to blues and reads on some films) But yeah that's great, I'm looking forward to the next release! (I'm still on 2.1 btw... I should jump on the 2.2 Beta)
@@pushingfilm ha, yeah, I knew what you meant! I've renamed that LUT to just "Natural" so users have a clearer idea of what kind of colors to expect. Huge improvements with curve engine in 2.2 - can't wait to see what you think!
@@natejohnson6245sounds good! I'll try and reconvert some and compare 😁
Another educational video, ordering as I type. thanks Hashem
Hi. Great explainer video. Very well done.
In your equipment links, you list four different light sources. On looking at them, it appears that a couple of them would have a hard time laying flat on a copy board because of various protrusions on the back. The Raleno and the Kaiser do not seem to have this feature, that I can tell.
Could you please comment on this?
Thanks! I have one such light with the protrusions. However, when used with the battery clipped on, it lies flat on the battery, which protrudes past the knobs and switches.
@@pushingfilm Thanks!
Have you any thoughts on using an Aristo cold light head as your light source? I have one on my 8x10 enlarger (that hasn't seen much use of late) and thought it might make a good light pad.
Wow nice product. Negative supply was always too expensive in my view. I have something similar home made that I use with a durst color copy for digitising negatives. Brilliant machine because it has colour filters for the light and people give them away as no one uses a camera to copy slides anymore.
Thanks for sharing this. I just placed an order.
Just ordered one. Now I have to invest in a macro lens. I think it will still be a better option than buying a quality scanner for 35mm and 120 film.
It definitely can be if you have good components and workflow!
Thanks for the excellent and timely review. A solution like this will motivate me to shoot more film! p.s. I immediately ordered the 35 and 120 masks.
Thanks man! That's a good thing :-D
Thanks - really useful. I have been DSLR scanning film for about 5 years using my old Epson neg holders over a tracing table light with a Nikon D810 - the 120 was troublesome as its hard to get flat. I have ordered a EFH which looks to be just the job. I hope a 5x4 mask is on the way but I can always improvise for that format.
Great to hear!
With the light source when scanning color film - If you know the white balance of the light source you are using you can simply adjust your camera's white balance to correct any color shift due to the light source.
It's not that simple I'm afraid! I too thought this for a while, before reading into it and getting information from other people's testing. Besides the actual colour temparature of the light, the source actually has an ability to illuminate colors in your negative differently across the spectrum (in my test they are all white balanced for the film base) There's some really useful information on this in the Negative Lab Pro Facebook group.
awesome review, so thorough. Thanks so much!!!!!
Ok great video and just ordered the kit. Thanks for the introduction. I’m currently using a epson V600 with good not great results.
Excellent video, really super! The one thing about the design that jumped out at me from the first seconds - why the wing-nuts? I'm no designer but neodymium magnets would so obviously be quicker to lock the mask in place and add to a cleaner design.
Thank you! I don't know for sure (you'd have to ask the designer) But, my thoughts are that with the wingnuts you can adjust the amount of tension to suit different situations. Sometimes there are particular film emulsions that are thicker/denser than others for example, and being able to loosen the plates only slightly would aid in feeding the film.
@@pushingfilm I'm sure you are right. The designer is no idiot and is no doubt aware of neodymium magnets as one type of solution, but maybe inappropriate for this application.
Excellent video thanks. As you said.... simple design but effective and I like the look of the LED light boxes, methinks it's time to put the LED downlight back in the lounge ceiling :-)
Interesting video, to improve even further the Colour output of your scans, use it always on the warmer colour side (3200K if you have a dual colour LED light). This because digital cameras are way better optimised to work with tungsten colour temperature light. Artificial lights have been 3200k for hundreds of years and technology during all this time learnt how to deal with that. Artificial 5500K colour temperature is very recent and even modern sensor can't deal with that so well as tungsten.
If then you use a real tungsten bulb as light source you would have the best possible CRI achievable today. Second only to the Sun.
Hey thanks man, this sound like a really useful tip with interesting reasoning behind it. I'm going to try it on the next time I scan and maybe even do a comparison with 5600k :)
Thank you Marco for the lesson. So is all about a balance from warm color light panel and a cooler white balance from our cameras, right? Trying to have a warm light and a WB that compensates to the most "grey", not orange, film scans in DSLR, is that statement right? . Thank you man.
@@juanamievagutierrez9567
Well it's not really like that, it's very complex:
Let say we are In a perfect world where artificial lights are perfect.
In this case if your light is 3200K and you match your camera WB to the same 3200K you should have the same exact colour rendition you have from the Sun at 5500K.
Unfortunately we are not in a perfect world and what I said above never happen in reality. No artificial light as today can arrive at the same colour rendition of the Sun.
(which for reference is the perfect light)
For perfect colour rendition I mean that any coloured object looks that exact the same tint as they do under the sun light at noon.
Some artificial lights can get close, but not as good as the Sun.
The closest type of light to the sun for colour rendition is the tungsten bulb (The old bulb that are only 3200K, and they generate lot's of heat.) Any bulb has the same accuracy point and Kelvin temperature. It's a very predictable light since every bulb produce the same result.
This is what the human being have used (mainly) for lighting since electricity was discovered (Until led arrived). Tungsten bulb is the second best light source you can use for colour rendition, sun is the first.
Today, tungsten bulb are almost disappeared (They need much more power even around 10 times more modern LED, and they generate a lot of heat.)
That's why we mainly use LED light for everything today, they vary a lot in Kelvin temps (2500 to 9000 or more) and the colour rendition index (CRI) depends a lot on the quality of the light.
The cheep led bulbs are very bad and it's what everyone use at home or office. Colours just look wrong under those lights, with green/yellow/magenta tints. Each colour respond in different ways with those lights, The same Red object for example can appear very different (More orange or more magenta) depending on the quality of the LED light used. And there is notting you can do about it, only be aware of it and use good quality led light.
There are LED light that can produce decent CRI close to what the tungsten bulb can give you (But not as good, just close enough). those LED lights are usually very expensive and used only for professional use like photography, cinema production, etc...
Having said all of that and knowing that LED lights are so bad in general.
If you own a professional led panel with adjustable Kelvin temperature (let say between (3200K and 6500K) you should have the best CRI performance using this light all to the warm side (at 3200K).
This because Digital Sensors have been designed for decades to deal with tungsten bulb (which was the most common light available in the past and also for professional use.) And they tend to be better optimised for this colour temperature. Also, LEDs manufacturer tends to do a better job to imitate a tungsten light source than the sun.
Marco Fazio thats great info, but we still have a problem after all the great info you provided, and this is, what LED panel to get? There mustn't be too many choices in the league of what you are suggesting.
@@slimnics I would say a led panel who has a CRI value of 95 or more (there are lot's of other reading value to look for as well but generally a light that arrive at that CRI score is a decent one.
I would avoid generic brand or very cheep one and I'll go with the best known on cinema industry.
If it's for scanning Film only a small Aputure AL-M9 Amaran at £50 it's a good choice. You need to find a way to diffuse the light evenly but it would be a good "inexpensive" and portable solution.
If you are looking for a multi purpose light you would use for photo shooting, lighting products etc... and also for scanning film I would go with a bigger panel. Some brand suggestion ordered by most expensive/better quality to Affordable option/still good colour quality :
Lupo, Aputure, Falconeyes, Godox.
Look for reviews and compare CRI values. I would go with the highest score you can afford.
If you don't have a big budget but you really want the best possible result of scanning film, just find or buy an old halogen incandescence desk lamp and find a way to light your film with that. It's the cheeper option and the best one for final result but it's the worse for practicality because you have to deal with lot's of heat that the light generate and you have to be carful not to burn or damage your film.
You just saved me $2000 on a Nikon Coolscan 9000. I can't believe how amazing these results are
what gear are you using. Does it cost the same as a Coolscan 9k
@@Zetaphotography Nikon D7200 plus a Macro lens, both of which I already had before I restarted shooting film. These days that is about a $700 combo. Will be upgrading the camera soon because it is about time, and will be upgrading the macro lens because it is an old 105 f/4 Ai-s, not the sharpest or best macro lens
Thanks for the review!
The weakest point of this EFH in my opinion is, that it moves much too easily: it stands on 4 plastic knobs and it is light. Especially to scan an entire uncut film, you can’t just advance the film without holding the EFH. Therefore, I have to adjust the frame for every picture.. (!!) What am I doing wrong? How to prevent the slippery EFH from moving on the light source or table..?
And besides this, I haven’t found out how to place the light source correctly. How bright should the the light source, a video lamp, be? Full power or less? Distance between light source and diffuser? Distance between. diffuser and film?
Anyways, I am really not inexperienced in this field, but somehow it does not work for me so far with the EFH. That’s sad, because I had high expectations..
With the same setup (Sony a7II, Sony Macro 50 f2.8, Kaiser Slimlight Plano, copy stand, negativelpro in LR), but using a film holder that I found on a 3D-print site for free, I get much perfect results, much better than with my Epson V800 and even better than with my Plustek 8200/Silverfast...
Any suggestions for the EFH...?
I have tested so much gear that I could have bought the negativesupply holder easily..
Hey! Im not too sure to be honest! I just scanned another 2 whole uncut 35mm rolls last night and I didnt have the holder+lightpad move at all. The frame stayed in the exact same spot in my camera's view and I would pull through the film with one hand and trigger the remote shutter with the other. Perhaps its the surface of my light, or it's size. I will do some testing with my larger Neewer light, which has a larger and more slippery surface. I had someone else ask something similar and I imagine if I did have it slip unecessarily i would maybe try a little dab of bluetack on the edge of whatever is slipping and the surface underneath it. But my video light doesnt really move around either when I pull the film... maybe the cutting mat on my desk adds more grip. It's a valid concern and I'll see if I encounter what you're saying as time goes on. As for the light, I use it all full power always, and have it directly under the diffuser of the EFH.
Also, theres a lot of technical information on the "how-to" link in the video description, especially about things like the distances between surfaces etc. You mind find some things helpful on that page too
Thanks, mate! I guess I have to do some more testing...
@@etienneportail5122 No worries man. If you're using the Kaiser (they are super smooth!), it could be worth masking off stray light that goes beyond the diffuser feet with electrical tape, as that will help with scan results and maybe provide a border to prevent slipping at the same time. Otherwise, the Blu-Tak trick would probably be the easiest solution, I'll test it myself some time and see.
©stickboymusic thank you very much, also for the picture ! I will try this setup and additionally glue the feet of the EFH on the Kaiser slimlite plano with Blu Tak. If it works, I would prefer this setup to scan film that is already cut in stripes of 6 or 4 negatives (my father‘s archive which I intend to digitalize...) and I will continue to use my other setup for uncut film with the following piece which works marvelously for me (and for which I even found a very simple solution to use it in day light) - you find it on www.thingiverse.com/thing:3985120/comments
Just ordered mine, thanks for the video
Nice! Thanks for watching it :-)
Just ordered one great video thanks!!
I've had mine for a few months now. I love it.
Nice man! What light source do you use?
@@pushingfilm lightbox and Speedlight.
@@pushingfilm Here's a light to a video of my setup. facebook.com/jammiyork/videos/10156984681157046
Is there a difference between the Raleno and Viltroxi Video lights regarding light brightness, quality of light, costs, and ease of use plugins in or charging up? Great video thanks, FW
Hey Hashem! I really love your channel and your vibe. After this video I decide to buy the EFH. I was also wondering if you could do a video on your workflow from scanning to archives? I always struggle about shorting scanned pictures from different sources and I was wondering how you do it. Keep the good works!
Hey Jean, I really appreciate that. I'm always glad if the videos can help even in some small way. My system for organisation is okay, but not the best. I'm still trying to refine it, as it's gotten me in trouble sometimes trying to find old images. Once I have a good, demonstratable system, (from start to finish), I definitely plan to make a video on the subject!
Thats really at a good price compared to all other options
An incredibly useful video - thank you. I've been looking at the EFH for a while, but your review answered pretty much all my questions - not least the "curly film problem". The only remaining question is how easy is it to load a single negative?
Great review, very detailed and organised
Thank you!
In reference to your light source comparison, how did you use the Viltrox video light as your source since it does not have a flat back? Did you build a frame to hold it horizontal? Do you have any recommendations for light pads/boxes that would give correct color rendition, diffused light, and won't break the bank?
With a battery clipped on the Viltrox lies flat :-) That one, and the rechargeable Raleno unit in the video description are still my recommendations currently... but there are probably a lot more on the market that I don't know about!
A brilliant bit of reviewing !!
Great video, thanks. I just received my EFH after watching your review. It is a great product but I find the only con is that it doesn't guide the film on the sides. Nearly all the 35mm film I scan is in strips and when I first received it I was unable to persuade strips to go through. I had to loosen the screws a bit. I find that every frame as it is pushed through has to be juggled up and down to get it centred, this adds quite a bit of time to the process. Lateral guides would improve the performance. I guess I'll get used to it.
Hey, it should actually have a clear or white guide layer, as with mine in the video footage. Unless you maybe bought the special borders mask, without getting the regular mask?
@@pushingfilm Hi, thanks for replying. I have just had a look and there is a white guide layer but there was a slight bend in the old 35 mm negative strips when I tried to push them through emulsion side up, they were not engaging. I have tightened the wing nuts a bit more and tried again. I find if I insert them shiny side up then they engage and go through without problems, emulsion side up still gives issues. I have captured shiny side to camera before and had no problems (and you don't have to flip images afterwards) So I may just do that. Thanks, I have subscribed to your site.
Wonder what your thoughts are comparing the Essential Holder to the Basic 35 Film Holder by Negative Supply, Hashem....
I've yet to try the Negative Supply basic holder, but will share some comparison thoughts if I do!
@@pushingfilm A few thoughts, man:
1. Just ordered the Basic 35 by Negative Supply, and on the way I found out so many other holders for a similar 79$ price point. Say, the Digitaliza+ or FSCPRO v2 by LameraKraft (so weird). It is indeed hard to decide what's good and if, say, that Negative Supply 35 holder has enough distance away from the light source? (i had the idea of placing the diffuser from pixl late below it), or if there's too much room for the film inside the holder to move- then your framing will suffer variation (heard it may happen on the Essential Holder).
There's a lot of undiscussed gray area, that's what I'm saying.
2. The main thing that gave me an indication on what to go for was if it's made of a solid material (+plus portability). The Essential film holder (same price point as well) looks flimsy so I was worried it would move with every touch of film advancement, yet I bet it makes up with it's height distance+diffusion. I'd be worried traveling with it, though, cause it may break. And I wonder if thise wing nuts needed recalibration to make sure the plates are always leveled if you take it apart and build it again (,or just switch between 35 & 120).
Brilliant videos, thank you
Thank you for your indepth video. I appreciate it a lot.
Glad it was helpful!
Great work on this video!! It came out soooo good 💯💯💯
Thanks babe :-) Everyone is still waiting on your Minolta review ;-)
Thanks a lot for your thoughts. I just received my EFH a week ago and maybe I will find some time on the weekend for first tests. Up to now I used a Plustek scanner and it worked quite well. But I will try some medium format shooting in the future and that's why I purchased the EFH. A question about Negative Lab Pro: Are you only using it for color negatives, or for b/w, too? Does it make sense to get Negative Lab Pro for someone like me who mostly shoots b/w? Thanks, all the best from Switzerland and take care.
Could you please do a review of negmaster? Love that software for converting negatives!
I haven't heard of that one! Will look into it 🙂
Ive been scanning negs with my Nikon D810 / D 850 for years with a holder I built my self in 2017 that looks very similar to this one. I guess I should have made a business out of it.
I would 100% recommend using flash when scanning, its far more powerful and better then any continuous light. I have a made my diffusion box based on a Durst / LPL Darkroom Enlarger mixing box, that's the ultimate even light. Forget these LED light tables.
For 120 the “V3” top plate is a million miles better :)
Have been watching this video 3 times now and I'm really thinking about ditching my Epson flatbad in exchange for this. Question, do you use the 100mm canon marco? And what color profile do you use on the images that you import in Lightroom? For Canon, my images normally come in with Canon Standard color profile, but my guess is that you have to use the NLP profiles?
I know how you feel! I bit the bullet and just sold my V800. I use the 100mm Macro L 2.8, and yeah I have definitely been using the NLP camera profiles! Outside of scanning I usually use the Adobe standard profile or other ones such as "film" presets etc.
@@pushingfilm Thanks for your reply! Already ordered the EFH so i guess my flatbed scanner will be on ebay soon... ;)
Great video ! 2 questions, 1) what would be the best light source in the list you mention, or another one small better one if you know, that would not exceed a few hundred bucks ? 1) what DSLR resolution would you recommend to get the best out of 35 mm pos and negs, without maybe cranking up the full 45MP of my new R5. I have only 35 mm and I just ordered the EFH. Thanks
Hey Arnaud. I definitely recommend the L116T for it's cost, size, and the results I get in terms of scans. Anything smaller than this may not sit nicely under the EFH. As for resolution, I would always recommend going with the highest resolution your camera is capable of (if hard drive space isn't an issue) in case you need it later. But given what you said, 20-30MP is still way more than enough for 35mm if using a macro lens and filling the frame/sensor. Having the extra MP would only be useful for cropping in, or printing big.
@@pushingfilm Just ordered that panel ! Thanks a lot, can't wait to start scanning, I found myself a good second hand kaiser stand as well.
Hello again, just got the L116T. 2 questions : how to you make it hold flat and stable with the EFH on top ? And, as the color temp is 5000K and cannot be ajusted to 6500K (the max is 5600 apparently), how do you integrate this in a D65 workflow and get accurate white bal ? THANKS !
O use the digitaliza with little “pads” to make it higher in the same v800. And came much, much more sharper.
This is awesome! Wayyyy cheaper option than Negative Supply who charge $500!
Yep, that's money for a good lens 💰😁
Comprehensive video, thank you and Yes, a 6X12 mask would be nice.
Fantastic video as always, thanks for you thoughtful review! Have you ever considered using an off-camera flash for illuminating your scans? I understand that strobes have a cri rating of 100. Flash also allows for a high shutter speed and high aperture without having to run a high wattage light source. I’m considering replacing my cheap eBay light panel with a flash in a box below the film holder.
I have thought about that! I would need to find a way to rig it up easily, but I have heard that this would have the advantages you mentioned
I have tried this approach. Although off-camera flash is powerful and daylight balanced, the main problem is that it's non-continuous. This makes it difficult to focus and frame accurately, especially when the depth of focus is so narrow. You can get around this problem by rigging a focus preview light, but in my experience it's simpler to use a bright, continuous, even, daylight-balanced light source to begin with.
I just received my Mixlator but have yet to try it out. I need to get a good lightbox or video light before I can test things. It looks like a good product though.
Nice, I'm really interested to see how it works in comparison
Do they have a 127 holder? ...and is the 'Essential Film Holder' available in the USA?
To my knowledge, there is no 127 mask. The EFH ships worldwide for free, USA included.
Watching from thePhilippines, sir. 🤩🇵🇭
Greetings from down-under 😁
Great video, Hashem. I'm wondering how you keep the Viltrox L116T level when you put the EFH unit on top to scan? I was thinking maybe leave it in the box to keep it stable and level, but I think with the battery pack in place, it probably wouldn't fit. Any advice most appreciated! Cheers, Doug.
Hey, for me it just sits flat on the batteries I use. I then level the camera using a mirror
I will be interested in this product as my Nikon Coolscan LS 50 is getting old now but, in your comparison the file used from the lab was a JPG and the one from the DSLR a TIFF. JPG looses a lot of information and bit depth due to compression compared to TIFF. It would have been better if both files were of the same type.
I will second everything you have said in this video! Since the mid-1970s, I've spent a lot of time copying film (and prints and art and a little of everything else). At one point, I had thousands of dollars' worth of tools at work that I used to do that. Now I'm retired.
For the last few years, I've used a home brew setup made from junk in my closet, including old Omega B22 enlarger negative carriers and a slide holder fashioned from popsicle sticks and cardboard! An old iPhone with a "blank" JPEG displayed was my light source. It worked fine, but slowly. I saw your video several months ago, ordered the Viltrox light and the EFH 35mm negative/120 film/35mm slide mask setup, and have started digitizing my film collection from my youth.
BUT, I have one big question: What are you doing to hold the light and the EFH absolutely still under the camera? They are light weight and slippery. The EFH slides all over the light at the slightest touch.
For efficiency, I want to set up the camera-to-EFH alignment once, then work for hours without changing it. I just want to work through hundreds of slides and negatives as quickly as possible. So far, I've found I have to realign the holder in the viewfinder for every copy. Then I have to do the same thing in Lightroom Classic. I want to be able to apply the same exact crop to every frame, making full frame proofs without having to visit the crop tool in LrC until I do a final photofinishing job.
Hi William! I addressed a bit more on how I use the EFH in a newer video on the channel, including the issue you mentioned of the feet slipping, and how I keep frames in the same alignment. Its a newer one on the channel called "Batch Scanning Film..." and hopefully it will help!
Thanks for the great video. Is the diffuser 3mm thick? My LED lights are so bright I'm not sure if a 3mm thickness would be okay.
Hi Hashem, great review! 0:14 into the video the EFH is put on top of a light source, is that the Viltrox L116T? Does the EFH fit within the frame of the Viltrox? Thanks.
Thank you 🙂 It does!
Great video. Thanks