Macro photography of 35mm slides <moved>

I've been gearing up and testing to develop a method to digitize about 1600 35mm slides from my film days.

Yes, I could send them out for scanning. I could purchase a scanner. Either of which is expensive of time & money to capture. And the post processing!. Capturing with a cam seems to make a lot of sense to me, because it leverages existing investments in workflow from capture to processing to distribution. Once set up, it *sounds* quick and easy.

I'd much appreciate any feedback or ideas on what I'm building towards, which is building a rig for macrophotography of the slides.

Cam is Canon APS-C.

After some futzing around with CU lenses and extension tubes, I've about decided that to get coverage of a 24x36mm area at a reasonable working distance I'm going to need a real macro lens.

The Tamron SP 90mm Di Macro for example, natively covers a full frame sensor at 1:1. I'm thinking that on my crop sensor, it will sample a part of that coverage, .6 of it or so, effectively yielding greater mag than 1:1.

Am I thinking about this the right way? How much greater mag than 1:1?

If the lens does 1:1 with a minimum focusing distance of about 11 inches on FF, that would imply that my working distance for the slide image will be about 18". Right?

These are slides dating back to the early 1950s, most in carboard mounts. The film tends to set on a curve. At f8 or so, would a half millimeter of curve fall within expected DoF?

It's been decades since I did any macrography, and never did do that much. Would appreciate any guidance on this task! I've found a couple of online blogs, but so far my testing without a real macro hasn't been good.

BTW, I'm building a translucent plexi stage for the slides to slide along, rear-lit with strobe or tungsten, TBD.

I have moved you to macro talk.

I really wouldn't try photographing them, get a film scanner. The results will be faster and better quality.

I recently replaced my old Minolta film scanner (no support on Windows 7) with a Plustek 8200i SE OpticFilm Scanner http://plustek.com …200i-se/introduction.html. Typical price is 239.00 UKP.

This is actually better than my old Minolta in terms of speed and quality plus it has an infrared channel to remove dust and scratches.

Thanks for your reply Lester. And for the quick moderation, I'm new here, but now I understand better how the forum is organized

So... with your Plustek, how much time are you going to spend on a slide capture & post processing?

Any way to quantify the quality gain from a dedicated scanner?

There's just something so appealing about taking a card out of my camera, dropping the contents in lightroom, and we're off for a quick edit and post to the web at a photo sharing site - all within LR.

The last time I touched scanners it was minutes per slide just to capture, and then the software was horrible too.

Did I mention 1600 slides? I'm imagining I'm going to need to be accepting of medium-plus quality if I'm to get through this project. Any key images can be re-done as needed.

I think the time factor is about 1 min per slide depending on the resolution you set, most do not seem to need the highest. If you use the IR channel it is a second scan adding time. The software is ok, I can get good scans with good colour balance straight com the scanner if I get it it meter off the right part of the slide.

To do it with a camera you would have all the same colour balance and exposure issues plus major plane alignment problems, even lighting and fine manual focus. I have tried it and it is hard work and poor results.

There was (back in the pre digital days) a slide copying kit consisting of a close focuse lens, slide mount and light diffuser all in one assembly. I don't think the quality was great but that would probably be your best bet for in camera.

With in camera you will have major dust and scratch removal issues no mater how careful you are, the scanner with an IR channel takes care of at least 90% of that work.

The setup I have is a Nikon PB-6 macro bellows, Nikon PS-6 Slide Copying Adapter, 55 Micro-Nikkor, and a Nikkor-Canon adapter, mounted on a Canon 5D III. The Nikon components were sourced from KEH and very reasonable. Very solid setup. If no cropping involved each frame takes only a few seconds to shoot, plus whatever time is needed to clean the slides (the most important time savings).

J, thanks.

Yes, I'd shoot everything to fill the frame. That you're on FF and I'm not may change the magnification picture. Bellows are going to have a substantial minimum extension, right?

But your setup is basically what I'm thinking of replicating, with or without bellows. Of course what you're doing gives you a perfect lineup every time, I'll be measuring every time.

What's your cleaning method?

And, how do you like the quality compared to scanning.

Gotta' love the speed... seems like when your slides are clean, you could shoot in maybe 10 to 15 seconds, or, 4x to 6x the speed of scanning. Which will make a huge difference for my project...

Re magnification I would need to put the 7D on and take a look but my guess is that with the 55 I would have sufficient room to get the full image.

Re cleaning - it depends on what you have to remove, back in the lab rat days we used low pressure compressed air from a compressor that had a good filtration system to remove dust. Stuff like fingerprints would usually respond to Kodak film cleaner. Some stuff only dissolves in water to you're stuck with unmounting, washing, etc. so major pain.

Re quality - well it's not a scan, but there are multiple quality levels in scanning so you need to know what you're comparing to. For instance if you have an image you want the best possible scan from the go to guy is probably Lenny Eiger who would do a drum scan. I also have a print made from a 4x5 neg scanned on an Epson V750 that's just stunning. My wife scans on a Durst Sigma and it makes superb prints as well. Really depends on your objectives, budget, time constraints, and standards.

If I get a chance in the next day or two I might put up a shot of one of my Kodachromes shot with my setup.

OK I made a test with the 55 Nikkor and my 7D and you're correct there is insufficient AOV to get the entire chrome using my setup. A 35 would probably be the better choice. Here is a sample from a Kodachrome using my 5D III. There is more DR in the chrome that could probably be captured with some HDR tactics.

Fishing Boat - Guaymas Mexico ca. 1981

J, thanks once again!

The quality of the capture seems sufficient for processing to most any look desired. Shadows below the boat look a little dense, were they that dark in the chrome? I'll have to look at it on the big monitor later. (iPad right now)

My project has been on hold in favor of more urgent gigs, but I see daylight for Friday. Gonna' rent the 100L macro and see how it works. I'm guessing I'll have a working distance of 20 inches... will post back with results and methods. I think it's all going to be great, or at least sufficient for work in bulk... but I want to see it work before buying a lens.

There is plenty of shadow detail in the chrome and there is actually more detail in the shadows in the copy but I didn't pull the shadows up.

J Michael wrote in post #16830186
OK I made a test with the 55 Nikkor and my 7D and you're correct there is insufficient AOV to get the entire chrome using my setup. A 35 would probably be the better choice. [/IMG]

If the bellows is too long for the 55mm, you need a longer focal length, not a shorter.

Oh right you are, bellows changes everything.