Categories
pinhole technical

Analyzing pinhole with scanner

I’ve read many times that people analyze their pinholes with a scanner. I tried this today with Epson V600 and my conclusion is that the resolution is nowhere near to make any good analysis. The shape / quality of the hole is probably pretty hard to see. I scanned at 2400 dpi and on my file one pixel equals 0.01mm so the difference between 0.28 and 0.32mm pinhole is only four pixels. 

These are two commercial pinholes from eBay. The millimeters are the advertised sizes and the cyan lines are lines placed for the advetised millimeter distance.

Because the resolution is so low even at 2400 dpi scan, I can only say that the pinholes might be as advertised based on the measurements I made. Both pinholes were purchased from same seller (1 year apart). Based on sellers microscopic images the hole should be really clean.

Categories
grain technical

Digitizing film negative with digital camera

I’ve previously tried to digitize my 135 film with digital camera without any great results. Few years ago I purchased Canon FD slide copier + bellow combo and it takes only Canon FD lenses so I tried with 1.8 50mm FD lens and the results were .. horrible. Well, great in stylistic way.

I printed some mounting rings so I could use enlarger lens instead of the smuhy mushy FD lens. I got everything running and ..

I was blown away by the quality.

Left: Digitized version, Right: clip from the 30x40cm darkroom print

I rushed to pick one of my favorite negative which shows Tri-X grain in beautiful way and digitized that. I was very sure I couldn’t pick that grain. But it almost did. So close but remember this is quite a challenge. Grain (or actually; the grain clumps) are very small. The part used as example is a small part of 135 film negative.

The clip analyzed here is about 13x18cm from 30×40 enlargement. Calculate the enlargement amount if you want, it is quite big. The original is 135 negative.

I think digitizing this way is very very good This is just unbeliavable and mind blowing. I never understood digitizing with digital camera could produce such high quality. Also the easyness digitizing a single roll is so much faster than with scanner when the roll is uncut. I believe it takes 2-3 minutes to capture all 36 frames – and the quality is much much better than with flatbed scanner.

So question: is this some kind of hidden secret? Voodoo? Is the flatbed mafia next to my door when I post this?

Digitized with Fujifilm X-T30 + Nikkor 50mm enlarger lens, ISO 160, 0.9s exposure time. On right darkroom print on silver gelatin.

Below is the full frame from 135 film negative (and the previous clip):