www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - My Setup For Copying Transparencies Onto Digital
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
My Setup For Copying Transparencies Onto Digital

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Harold Gough



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5787
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:30 am    Post subject: My Setup For Copying Transparencies Onto Digital Reply with quote

This was an offshoot of this project:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12349

I have thousands of transparencies of fine-grain film and the quickest way to share them here seemed to be to use a macro lens, my Olympus OM slide copiers and my OM flash.

Essentially, I used my OM flash, tilted downwards slightly, to illuminate a white card behind the slide copier. This would give a standard level of illumination to all the images, the lightness or darkness of principle parts of the image having no influence on the exposure on the sensor.

In these illustrative images of the hardware:

a) A wall stands in for the white card
b) The digital camera is missing from the righthand end of the setup as I needed it to take these shots.
c) AFor clarity, tripod was used, whereas in actual use, the digital camera and lens/below/copier combination are usually rested on top of a filing cabinet.

Hardware (copying unit, right to left):

a) Olympus E-P2 m4/3 camera (omitted in images) in M or S mode, 1/60 second, ISI 100 *
b) Olympus T32 set manually (not shown here, see final image and details) mounted on the hot shoe
c) Leica-R to m4/3 adapter
d) Leitz Elmarit 60mm macro lens
e) Reverse adapter
f) Olympus OM auto bellows (front stand reversed and nearest the camera, rear stand reversed and nearest the copier)
g) Blackened 49mm cardboard cylinder (from inside toilet roll), to link bellows to copier
h) Olympus OM slide copier

Total extension (working distance) 88mm (excluding distance to film emulsion, ca 32mm).

The kit 14-42mm lens was used for these shots of the hardware.



Showing a card-mounted transparency in position.



A view of the slide copier. (Vertical movements possible).



Settings on back panel of T32: ISO 25 f4:




Some of the results:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16977

* The sensor was found to be much more sensitive than film to the film flash. See the first link cited for details.

Harold
_________________
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DQE



Joined: 08 Jul 2008
Posts: 1653
Location: near Portland, Maine, USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A nice setup, and some very nice results from its use!
-------------------------------

100 lifetimes ago, while employed as a staff scientist at the Kodak Research Labs, I was always amazed how much very expensive equipment and how many staff were required to extract something close to the maximum image quality from color slides or color negatives. Mostly, a very high-resolution scanning microdensitometer was used, with the "PDS 1010" unit being most commonly used. In my own lab, we used similar instrumentation, adapted for black-and-white radiographic images, for our image quality research as well as digitizing radiographs at close to maximum achievable image quality.

While I never did any comparisons of different approaches, a carefully used high-quality setup like yours appears to extract very high image quality from your slides.
_________________
-Phil

"Diffraction never sleeps"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harold Gough



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5787
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, Phil,

Essentially, the digital sensor is the only significant difference from its use in the 1980s.

I am happy will the quality for posting here.

It used to be common practice to copy tranparancies. There were two levels of quality: low for projection, high for publication. I still have a pile of Kodak copying film in my freezer.

For professional purposes, even digital JPEGs have to be saved at quality 12 in Photoshop, and with a limited amount of sharpening.

Harold
_________________
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group