Novel way to avoid Newton rings when scanning negatives on a flatbed.

[Rolleiflexible]

There are numerous threads here about how best to scan negatives on a flatbed, mostly involving some model of Epson scanner.

For decades, I have just laid the negative directly on the scanner glass. This has worked for nearly all kinds of film -- mostly Tri-X but also PX, and Fomapan, and Efke, and Ilford Ortho. Until this week, the only film that did not behave was Tech Pan, which has a superthin emulsion and causes horrible Newton rings.

And yes, I've been told that the optimal negative placement is a couple of millimeters above the scanning glass. Working with roll film, I've not lost a lot of sleep over this.

HOWEVER

I finally broke doown and bought some TMax 100 and found that it plays well with making digital negatives. Except, alas: Newton rings.

Because there is no curl at all in the TMax 100 I shot and developed, I came up with a solution. (1) I laid down four coins (US quarters) on the glass, outside the image area of the negative frame. (2) I laid the negative on top of the coins. Then (3) I laid four more coins on top of the other coins. The coins held the negative flat, suspended a couple of millimeters above the scanner glass. No more Newton rings, and presumably a negative held closer to the optimal position for scanning.

Since there are probably no more than fourteen of us who still use scanners, I pass this along FWIW.

 

[Steven Lee]

@Rolleiflexible I can offer another variation of your workflow. Go on Amazon and buy a few sheets of black velvet paper, sometimes they're called "black felt paper". They come of various thickness within 2-5mm.

Take two sheets with the velvet sides facing each other and staple them together on one side. The alternative is to simply bend one sheet in half if it's big enough.

Then cut a hole (or a strip) matching your negative. And viola! You have a perfect film holder for flatbed scanning. Works for cameras too! The benefits of this setup are: easy to swap/advance negatives and built-in dust control.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

@Rolleiflexible I can offer another variation of your workflow. Go on Amazon and buy a few sheets of black velvet paper, sometimes they're called "black felt paper". They come of various thickness within 2-5mm.

Take two sheets with the velvet sides facing each other and staple them together on one side. The alternative is to simply bend one sheet in half if it's big enough.

Then cut a hole (or a strip) matching your negative. And viola! You have a perfect film holder for flatbed scanning. Works for cameras too! The benefits of this setup are: easy to swap/advance negatives and built-in dust control.

Yours would be a much better solution for negatives with some curl. My approach works only because TMax is on a base that dries flat.

 

[MattKing]

Sanders - I still use a flatbed scanner to digitize negatives, so you can make that 15 .

 

[Hassasin]

I don't understand 100% of this "approach".

Simply put, all flatbed scanners are not held to high precision standards, and the height above scanning head varies from one example to another. To get the best quality scan that height needs to be experimented with on every one of them, no fixed value, except it's possible that from holder supplied will actually be where it is best to be. It is also possible that best place to be is right on the glass and wet scanning maybe th actual best way to get the most.

Something like Betterscanning holders have been shown to get the most due to neat height adjusters built in, and AN glass helps keep film flat.

Another way is to get a piece of AN glass, tape negative to its underside and shim it above scanner's glass as needed for whichever example of scanner one uses.

 

[juan]

20-years ago, following a post on largeformatphotography I went to a framing store and bought two sheets of anti-glare picture frame glass cut to the size of the glass on my scanner. Put the negative between the sheets with the rough side of the glass facing the negative. Flat. No rings. In focus.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

There are numerous threads here about how best to scan negatives on a flatbed, mostly involving some model of Epson scanner.

For decades, I have just laid the negative directly on the scanner glass. This has worked for nearly all kinds of film -- mostly Tri-X but also PX, and Fomapan, and Efke, and Ilford Ortho. Until this week, the only film that did not behave was Tech Pan, which has a superthin emulsion and causes horrible Newton rings.

And yes, I've been told that the optimal negative placement is a couple of millimeters above the scanning glass. Working with roll film, I've not lost a lot of sleep over this.

HOWEVER

I finally broke doown and bought some TMax 100 and found that it plays well with making digital negatives. Except, alas: Newton rings.

Because there is no curl at all in the TMax 100 I shot and developed, I came up with a solution. (1) I laid down four coins (US quarters) on the glass, outside the image area of the negative frame. (2) I laid the negative on top of the coins. Then (3) I laid four more coins on top of the other coins. The coins held the negative flat, suspended a couple of millimeters above the scanner glass. No more Newton rings, and presumably a negative held closer to the optimal position for scanning.

Since there are probably no more than fourteen of us who still use scanners, I pass this along FWIW.

I use an Epson V850. Its film holders have height adjustments. I found there is a difference in focus depending on the height of the film holder. Laying flat on the glass isn't the best place to scan it. When the film holder is used, the scanner recognizes it and uses a better-quality scanning lens. There's a poorer second lens used for scans of negatives and photos on the scanner glass. Of course, this applies to the V850 and won't apply to certain other scanners like the Epson V600 which has one lens for both purposes.

Regarding Newtown rings, have you tried to reverse the film to the other side?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Just to clarify a point on the Epson V850. The nominal setting suggested on the adjustable film holders is 3.0mm. The adjustments vary from 2.5mm - 4.5mm with .5mm stops. I found the 3.0mm usually right although some holders were 0.5 higher or lower for best focus. I've tested holders for 35mm film strips, 120 and 4x5. I don't know what the fixed setting is on the V600 holders
V850 height: https://epson.com/faq/SPT_B11B22420...ers have height,0.12 inch) as indicated below.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Guys, this Is just an impromptu solution to a problem. I know all of the catechisms about optimal scanning techniques. I have an old Epson 4990. It has a fairly deep DOF. There might be an optimal point of focus. For my use, it doesn’t matter. Scanning on the glass is good enough. Until it isn’t because of Newton rings.

Using coins to suspend the negative just above the glass may or may not place the negative at its optimal focal position — I will never know. But it does get the negative off the glass and solve my Newton ring problem.

I lost my Epson carriers ages ago. I never used them because they cropped the film edges. I am sure I could spend money for a better solution. I would rather spend it on film.

 

[retina_restoration]

20-years ago, following a post on largeformatphotography I went to a framing store and bought two sheets of anti-glare picture frame glass cut to the size of the glass on my scanner. Put the negative between the sheets with the rough side of the glass facing the negative. Flat. No rings. In focus.

This is a very interesting idea, thanks.

 

[Pioneer]

Good idea for eliminating newton rings. I generally sandwich the negative in old picture frame glass; seems to work on my old V500. I had to use glass because, unlike your TMAX 100, mine does not always dry flat enough.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

There are numerous threads here about how best to scan negatives on a flatbed, mostly involving some model of Epson scanner.

For decades, I have just laid the negative directly on the scanner glass. This has worked for nearly all kinds of film -- mostly Tri-X but also PX, and Fomapan, and Efke, and Ilford Ortho. Until this week, the only film that did not behave was Tech Pan, which has a superthin emulsion and causes horrible Newton rings.

And yes, I've been told that the optimal negative placement is a couple of millimeters above the scanning glass. Working with roll film, I've not lost a lot of sleep over this.

HOWEVER

I finally broke doown and bought some TMax 100 and found that it plays well with making digital negatives. Except, alas: Newton rings.

Because there is no curl at all in the TMax 100 I shot and developed, I came up with a solution. (1) I laid down four coins (US quarters) on the glass, outside the image area of the negative frame. (2) I laid the negative on top of the coins. Then (3) I laid four more coins on top of the other coins. The coins held the negative flat, suspended a couple of millimeters above the scanner glass. No more Newton rings, and presumably a negative held closer to the optimal position for scanning.

Since there are probably no more than fourteen of us who still use scanners, I pass this along FWIW.

For which format?

 

[MattKing]

Guys, this Is just an impromptu solution to a problem. I know all of the catechisms about optimal scanning techniques. I have an old Epson 4990. It has a fairly deep DOF. There might be an optimal point of focus. For my use, it doesn’t matter. Scanning on the glass is good enough. Until it isn’t because of Newton rings.

Fixed your thread title for you

 

[MTGseattle]

Is it direct contact of negative with platen glass that causes newton rings in scanning, or something else?

I too have a 4990. My first round involved scanning a stack of coins to get an idea of the "best" height for my machine. My film holders don't have adjustments, but so far, the roll-film holders seem ok.
My biggest issue is with 8x10 negatives. I don't know where I would place coins or other shims and apply enough tension to hold the center of the negative on the same plane.
Someday, I'll remember to buy some extra glass.

 

[MattKing]

Is it direct contact of negative with platen glass that causes newton rings in scanning,

Yes - or any other glass, as the owners of glassed negative carriers can attest.

 

[koraks]

My biggest issue is with 8x10 negatives.

I don't see how the coin trick will work on this format; the film will sag too much. You'd have to have a tensioning system of some sort if you'd want to lift 8x10 off the glass.

Do you actually get Newton rings with your 8x10 scans? I ask because I shoot only Fomapan in 8x10 (there's a limit to how much I'm willing to spend on materials) and this scans just fine emulsion side down straight on the glass of a 4990. No Newton rings. TMAX will be a (very) different story.

 

[MTGseattle]

I have a few scans from 8x10 that have newton rings, unless I processed a thumb print right into the middle of the frame. (Delta 100)

 

[Rolleiflexible]

For which format?

TMX100 in 120 roll film.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I've experienced enough frustration with scanning on a flatbed for small formats that I've gone over to using my Fuji XT5 and a light box as a scanner. It of course helps to have a good copy stand, and a quality light source. I'll still use the flatbed for 5x7 through 8x10 film - that's faster and more accurate than trying to stitch together dozens of frames shot with the DSLR.

 

[ced]

There are numerous threads here about how best to scan negatives on a flatbed, mostly involving some model of Epson scanner.

For decades, I have just laid the negative directly on the scanner glass. This has worked for nearly all kinds of film -- mostly Tri-X but also PX, and Fomapan, and Efke, and Ilford Ortho. Until this week, the only film that did not behave was Tech Pan, which has a superthin emulsion and causes horrible Newton rings.

And yes, I've been told that the optimal negative placement is a couple of millimeters above the scanning glass. Working with roll film, I've not lost a lot of sleep over this.

HOWEVER

I finally broke doown and bought some TMax 100 and found that it plays well with making digital negatives. Except, alas: Newton rings.

Because there is no curl at all in the TMax 100 I shot and developed, I came up with a solution. (1) I laid down four coins (US quarters) on the glass, outside the image area of the negative frame. (2) I laid the negative on top of the coins. Then (3) I laid four more coins on top of the other coins. The coins held the negative flat, suspended a couple of millimeters above the scanner glass. No more Newton rings, and presumably a negative held closer to the optimal position for scanning.

Since there are probably no more than fourteen of us who still use scanners, I pass this along FWIW.

Good till you start scratching the glass.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I do the same thing usually for 120 and 4x5. Emulsion down straight on the glass. For 120 I put a sheet of anti glare plexi over the negs to hole them flat. Works. Easy. I got the plexi at Home Depot years ago. Cost like $2. I do the same even for Minox.

If you have to stack coins to eliminate newton rings then do it. Whatever works and is simple.

Of course there is wet scanning (sloppy) as well as corn starch, which isn't too bad. I've never used corn starch for scanning but I have for enlarging Acros. When corn starch is used right, it is undetectable and there isn't really any clean up.