Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: [film scanners] Re: Scanning old Lantern Slides


  • To: lexa@www.lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] Re: [film scanners] Re: Scanning old Lantern Slides
  • From: "Charles Stirling" <stirling@ndirect.co.uk>
  • Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 12:43:55 BST
  • Priority: Normal
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk

** Reply to note from filmscanners@halftone.co.uk Thu, 7 Feb 2002 22:35:02 -0600

> You have made a few assumptions that may not hold up completely.

Quite possibly :-)

> You assumed that it would be copied to true B&W film; but the original
> discussion which gave rise to the idea of copying the lantern slides to
> film suggested copying them to color film,

Nope.  I started the copying to film suggestion and didn't mention a type
of film.  It seemed to be just assumed somehow that it was color.  The
only colored lantern slides I've seen were hand colored and this didn't
seem likely, but we were not given the information.  To be honest I
hadn't even thought of color.

> Second, you seem to assume that scanning silver based b&W film is
> without any problems when in fact it can be problematic with respect
> to grain and other factors.

I've noticed on this list that some have problems and some don't.  Maybe
it doesn't need to be silver based, just my first thought and for archival
use I would have thought safer.

> Third, you assume that copying with a 35mm set up will be quick,
> inexpensive and requiring few rolls of film; but you ignore the fact
> that one might have to run several test rolls to test for exposures,
> filtration, and possible pre-flashing to reduce contrasts.

Maybe, but I would suspect a modern camera with exposure control
should cope for much of this :-).  Never used to have problems doing it
this way in the past.  Contrast, yes it can be a problem, but a low
contrast film/developer as would normally be used for copying B&W
slides I would think should do for lantern slides.  Here I'll admit I don't
know if these films are still available.

> Unlike 4x5 sheet film like Kodak Pro Copy

I thought this was for a charity with little money.  My suggestion stemmed
from talk of the need for specialist and expensive scanners, i.e. a
reason to avoid large format.

> Yes it may work for some flaws but not all - especially when they are
> flaws in the glass plate itself like air bubbles or distortions.

Usually the glass plates were optically pretty good.  Most common is
either a cracked cover glass (can simply be removed) or plate.  If this is
a tight crack it an oil with the same refractive index works.  No, if its
chips probably not.  If it is a tight crack can leave immersion oil in place,
but if any cleaning, sure have to be careful.

All of this of course depends on budget.  It is possible to get good copies
relativly cheeply, more money and yes maybe better.




Charles Stirling


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.