Wet Mounting by scanmax

[Guillaume Zuili]

Hi there,

I got from scanmax a wet mounting set for a flatbed scanner. The results are stunning. I just tried with a 665 Polaroid neg and the improvement is incredible.
For people interested, it's really worth it !

G.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETMOUNTING/

[sanking]

Hi there,

I got from scanmax a wet mounting set for a flatbed scanner. The results are stunning. I just tried with a 665 Polaroid neg and the improvement is incredible.
For people interested, it's really worth it !

G.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETMOUNTING/

I scan all of my negatives below 5X7" size with fluid mounting. I find the improvement significant, especially when scanning above about 3200 dpi. I would not call the difference in my result incredible compared to dry scans, but wet mounting is an improvement and definitely worth the trouble, IMO, especially when scanning at high dpi.

I use Kami mounting fluid, and made my own mounting glass for the Epson 4870 by epoxy gluing thin strips of brass onto a sheet of thin glass. This is very easy to make and also quite inexpensive.

I also scan roll film with fluid mounting with a speical glass mount for the Leafscan 45.

Sandy

[donbga]

I scan all of my negatives below 5X7" size with fluid mounting. I find the improvement significant, especially when scanning above about 3200 dpi. I would not call the difference in result incredible, but wet mounting is definitely worth the trouble, IMO, especially when scanning at high dpi.

I use Kami mounting fluid, and made my own mounting glass for the Epson 4870 by epoxy gluing thin strips of brass onto a sheet of thin glass. This is very easy to make and also quite inexpensive.

I also scan roll film with fluid mounting with a speical glass mount for the Leafscan 45.

Sandy

In what way would you say there is an improvement? Increased dynamic range? Less noise? Sharper images?

I've visited the Wet Mount forum before and looked at the examples shown online but could never observe to much of a difference except perhaps in the increase in highlight detail. But since the examples aren't clearly labeled I'm not sure what improvements are to be gained.

Don Bryant

[sanking]

In what way would you say there is an improvement? Increased dynamic range? Less noise? Sharper images?

I've visited the Wet Mount forum before and looked at the examples shown online but could never observe to much of a difference except perhaps in the increase in highlight detail. But since the examples aren't clearly labeled I'm not sure what improvements are to be gained.

Don Bryant

Don,

Improvement I have observed with fluid mounting is a slight increase in sharpness, much increased contrast, and much less prominent grain. The decrease in grain size, though bascially not relevant with LF scans, is very noticeable with roll film negatives, and would be even more apparent with 35mm I believe, though I don't use 35mm very often.

I also looked at the examples on the wet mount forum and could not see much difference on the computer monitor, but I definitely see an improvement in my scans.

BTW, in case I did not make myself clear in the previous message, I epoxy the thin brass strips on a piece of glass to form a frame just slightly larger than the LF film I want to scan. The frame prevents the mounting fluid from flowing over the glass and into the scanner. The glass is cut just large enough so that it fits over the scanner glass, but within the frame.

Sandy

[sanking]

In what way would you say there is an improvement? Increased dynamic range? Less noise? Sharper images?

Don Bryant

Don,

BTW, I am using Kami mounting fluid for most of my scanning of LF negatives. With this fluid clean up of the negative is very easy. Kami sometimes leaves a slight residue on the film which I remove by washing the film after scanning in a warm solution of water to which I add a few drops of mild dishwater liquid. I chose one about pH neutral in order to avoid any undesired swelling of the gelatin emulsion.

I have also used Johnson Baby Oil as the mounting fluid, and it is in some ways superior because its viscosity holds the negative flat during very long scans better than both the Scanmax and Kami fluids. You can easily clean negatives mounted with the Baby Oil, but it takes a slightly longer wash in the dishwater detergent than with the Kami.

Sandy

[donbga]

Don,

BTW, I am using Kami mounting fluid for most of my scanning of LF negatives. With this fluid clean up of the negative is very easy. Kami sometimes leaves a slight residue on the film which I remove by washing the film after scanning in a warm solution of water to which I add a few drops of mild dishwater liquid. I chose one about pH neutral in order to avoid any undesired swelling of the gelatin emulsion.

I have also used Johnson Baby Oil as the mounting fluid, and it is in some ways superior because its viscosity holds the negative flat during very long scans better than both the Scanmax and Kami fluids. You can easily clean negatives mounted with the Baby Oil, but it takes a slightly longer wash in the dishwater detergent than with the Kami.

Sandy

Sandy,

You are a mind reader! I was going to ask you about negative cleaning. I'm sure the baby oil smells nice. What dishwasher detergent do you use? After washing in the detergent I assume that the film receives a water wash and then a final treatment in Photoflo before drying.

As for your home made frame, I thought that your description made sense; does the top glass actually touch the film or does the film "float" in the oil similar to the oil emersion holders used for making huge projection enlargements from roll film? When I worked for Meisel Photochrome many years ago this was the method used to project images for mural sized prints.

The new Epson V 750 will be realeased soon and as I've heard it with be quite an improvement optically. Also Epson has some kind of wet mounting gimick as well. Apparently it will give results with 35 mm film comparable to a 4000 dpi dedicated film scanner.

I look forward to hearing about it.

Don

[sanking]

Sandy,

You are a mind reader! I was going to ask you about negative cleaning. I'm sure the baby oil smells nice. What dishwasher detergent do you use? After washing in the detergent I assume that the film receives a water wash and then a final treatment in Photoflo before drying.

As for your home made frame, I thought that your description made sense; does the top glass actually touch the film or does the film "float" in the oil similar to the oil emersion holders used for making huge projection enlargements from roll film? When I worked for Meisel Photochrome many years ago this was the method used to project images for mural sized prints.

The new Epson V 750 will be realeased soon and as I've heard it with be quite an improvement optically. Also Epson has some kind of wet mounting gimick as well. Apparently it will give results with 35 mm film comparable to a 4000 dpi dedicated film scanner.

I look forward to hearing about it.

Don

Don,

The dishwasher liquid I am using for the clean up is called Sun Light Ultra (The greater grease fighter, El luchador contra la grasa). I bought it at a local Ingles grocery store, $1.08 for a 14.7 ounce bottle. Made in Canada for Phoenix Brands of Stanford, CT.

However, I am thinking that most dishwater liquids should be very similar. After all, this is the first one I picked off the shelf when I went looking for a diswashing degreaser.

However, I was advised to avoid detergents that worked at high pH, and this one works at about base.

Sandy

[Guillaume Zuili]

Improvements are,
-sharpness increase, more contrast, and lot less dust to remove on photoshop...

[sanking]

As for your home made frame, I thought that your description made sense; does the top glass actually touch the film or does the film "float" in the oil similar to the oil emersion holders used for making huge projection enlargements from roll film? When I worked for Meisel Photochrome many years ago this was the method used to project images for mural sized prints.

Don

Don,

With the Epson 4870 the top of the TMA remains quite removed from the mounting glass, and from the extra elevation of the brass film frames. This is also true with my Microtek 9800XL. Doint' know about other flatbeds, but suspect the same would apply.


Sandy