Old slide scans - progress

[geogphotos]

Quite a few forum members have been kind enough to help with identifying locations, cars, planes, etc so I thought it would be of interest to some to see what I have done.

 

And also which images have been licensed by Alamy so far.

 

I've done a brief blog post with gallery links

 

https://blog.geographyphotos.com/2023/12/21/film-copying-progress/?fbclid=IwAR35V55TFh1r_vnDXk3wDJPycogmlMxEYpK2KSRbG4TTS_LitAXlqNkxu9w

Edited December 21, 2023 by geogphotos

[Malcolm Park]

Some really interesting transparencies you have saved there, well worth a look through. For what it’s worth a few captions which may or may not be useful:

 

0096IDM.jpg - plane is a Vickers Vanguard

0151IDM.jpg - plane is a VC10

0274IDM.jpg - nearest plane is a Boeing 727

0290IDM.jpg - most boats in the harbour are the traditional Scottish Seine Netters (remember them well - went out in one overnight once off West Coast).

0968IDM.jpg - parts of temple: Pediment, Tympanum, Cornice, Frieze, Architrave, Capital (Corinthian order) (remembered from study of architecture at art school - Greek/Roman styles drummed into us).

[geogphotos]

Many thanks Malcolm. 

 

Very kind of you to take the time to add this help. 

 

I'm noticing lots of ommissions and errors...

 

0037IDM Netherlands but no location. 

 

Some mucky old pics at the start too😂

Edited December 21, 2023 by geogphotos

[Matt Ashmore]

Dare I ask what you are using / how you convert slides to digital? My parents have a number of slides which might be worthy of having a go at converting but I'm not sure where to start.

[geogphotos]

3 minutes ago, Matt Ashmore said:

Dare I ask what you are using / how you convert slides to digital? My parents have a number of slides which might be worthy of having a go at converting but I'm not sure where to start.

 

I use a Canon 100 macro lens and a Nikon ES-1 on Canon 5D Mk3 ( plus a ring adapter) 

 

Just ruminating how much better my recent pics are in scan quality and selection.

 

But then if I had waited until I know what I know now I wouldn't have yet started! 

[spacecadet]

27 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

But then if I had waited until I know what I know now I wouldn't have yet started!

Likewise, I did 95% of mine with an unbranded enlarging lens hot-glued onto a BPM bellows, then moved onto a big process lens. It would all have been nicer with the Tamron 90 macro I now use.

I got a cheap Illumitran and made my own masks and carriers out of cardboard and plasticard. If you have a lot to do it's worth having a rig that lets you position originals easily and repeatably.

Edited December 21, 2023 by spacecadet

[geogphotos]

28 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

Likewise, I did 95% of mine with an unbranded enlarging lens hot-glued onto a BPM bellows, then moved onto a big process lens. It would all have been nicer with the Tamron 90 macro I now use.

I got a cheap Illumitran and made my own masks and carriers out of cardboard and plasticard. If you have a lot to do it's worth having a rig that lets you position originals easily and repeatably.

 

 

Yes, my first ones were done with very Heath-Robinson set up of camera on a tripod above lightbox on the floor trying to get things aligned best I could by eye...

 

Then Alan Gallery used his 3D printer to create a slide holding mechanism and that got me started along the right path. 

Edited December 21, 2023 by geogphotos

[wiskerke]

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

0037IDM Netherlands but no location.

Veermanskade in Hoorn. From number 3 on the left hand side upwards. View towards the Nieuwendam (New Dam) and Korenmarkt (Grain/Wheat Market) with the Hoge Brug (High Bridge).

The harbor, now a municipal marina is called Binnenhaven (Inner Harbor/Harbour).

Here on Alamy.

 

wim

 

 

[geogphotos]

12 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

Veermanskade in Hoorn. From number 3 on the left hand side upwards. View towards the Nieuwendam (New Dam) and Korenmarkt (Grain/Wheat Market) with the Hoge Brug (High Bridge).

The harbor, now a municipal marina is called Binnenhaven (Inner Harbor/Harbour).

Here on Alamy.

 

wim

 

 

 

 

Perfect. Thanks Wim 😁

[MDM]

5 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

Dare I ask what you are using / how you convert slides to digital? My parents have a number of slides which might be worthy of having a go at converting but I'm not sure where to start.

 

If you have a day or so to spend you could always read through the following gigantic forum thread from early 2020 on slide copying or you could just look at Page 1 and take the advice I gave at the beginning  to use the Nikon ES-1 slide copier with a macro lens. EDIT: The ES-1 is still available from Nikon UK or Amazon (cheaper).

 

I have a vague memory that you are or were a Nikon user which is advantagageous as you might not need additional adapters but you would need a macro lens if you don't have one. 

Edited December 21, 2023 by MDM

[IKuzmin]

5 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

Dare I ask what you are using / how you convert slides to digital? My parents have a number of slides which might be worthy of having a go at converting but I'm not sure where to start.

 

As others, the ES-1 which is still available

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/37453-REG/Nikon_3213_ES_1_Slide_Copying_Adapter.html

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/slide-copy-adapters/es-1-slide-copying-adapter-for-52mm-thread.html

 

With Canon EF 24-105/4L and Vello 25 mm macro extension tube. Did not see any difference compared to Canon EF 100/2.8L macro lens. 

 

But did see color degradation in many old slides which made them useless for copying or for anything also.

 

When I scanned some slides with Nikon Coolscan Film Scanner ~20 years ago (do not remember the exact model), the slides were still good but the scans were banded!

[geogphotos]

2 hours ago, IKuzmin said:

 

As others, the ES-1 which is still available

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/37453-REG/Nikon_3213_ES_1_Slide_Copying_Adapter.html

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/slide-copy-adapters/es-1-slide-copying-adapter-for-52mm-thread.html

 

With Canon EF 24-105/4L and Vello 25 mm macro extension tube. Did not see any difference compared to Canon EF 100/2.8L macro lens. 

 

But did see color degradation in many old slides which made them useless for copying or for anything also.

 

When I scanned some slides with Nikon Coolscan Film Scanner ~20 years ago (do not remember the exact model), the slides were still good but the scans were banded!

 

 

This is where Kodachrome is supreme. 60 year old slides still with great colour. 

 

A delight to work with them. Other film makes much less so.

[IKuzmin]

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

This is where Kodachrome is supreme. 60 year old slides still with great colour. 

 

I heard this but never had a chance to try Kodachrome.

 

[spacecadet]

15 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

This is where Kodachrome is supreme. 60 year old slides still with great colour. 

 

A delight to work with them. Other film makes much less so.

The non-chromogenic dyes have very good dark stability.. Oddly though the operative word is "dark"- if they're actually projected they have much worse colour fading than other makes.

So keep it dark. Sorry Guinness.

I always preferred the colour of the pre-E6 Agfa so I went over to it in 1977 and didn't use K64 again until a US trip when I ran out of E6. It was odd having non-process-paid Kodachrome- Kodak still processed it though, they just weren't allowed to sell the package. The colour seemed to have improved but maybe it was just the quality of light in the western US.

Edited December 22, 2023 by spacecadet

[IKuzmin]

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

I always preferred the colour of the pre-E6 Agfa

 

You may laugh but until 1990s I could only use Orwochrom and sometimes Fomachrom which I developed myself in the bathroom. Then E6 films and labs came, if we could afford them with our income. Only in the early 2000s when moved to the US I became more flexible but the digital era came…

 

Interesting, I still have some 6x9 cm Kodak dups made from my 24x36 mm Orwochrom slides by some processing labs for publishing in 1990s. They retained colors better than the faded originals. But I have no idea how to digitalize them now. And they are really few for a DIY project, so I guess RIP… as well as 24x36 mm dups made by my that-time-agent in Switzerland which from the beginning were inferior to the original in their sharpness (at least I did not pay for those dups! 🙂)

[spacecadet]

15 minutes ago, IKuzmin said:

 

You may laugh but until 1990s I could only use Orwochrom and sometimes Fomachrom which I developed myself in the bathroom. Then E6 films and labs came, if we could afford them with our income. Only in the early 2000s when moved to the US I became more flexible but the digital era came…

 

Interesting, I still have some 6x9 cm Kodak dups made from my 24x36 mm Orwochrom slides by some processing labs for publishing in 1990s. They retained colors better than the faded originals. But I have no idea how to digitalize them now. And they are really few for a DIY project, so I guess RIP… as well as 24x36 mm dups made by my that-time-agent in Switzerland which from the beginning were inferior to the original in their sharpness (at least I did not pay for those dups! 🙂)

I have one 5x4 tranny from college and I copied it using a studio softbox as a lightbox with the macro lens, but there's so much detail that the long end of a kit zoom would do. I think I rigged up a retort stand as a support but you could use any sort of clamp.

I used one roll of Orwochrom in 1980. It had (has) a strong green cast in the shadows.

Edited December 22, 2023 by spacecadet

[IKuzmin]

12 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I used one roll of Orwochrom in 1980. It had (has) a strong green cast in the shadows.

The lot-to-lot variability was quite substantial... But my bathroom processing could contribute to that as well.

[Matt Ashmore]

On 21/12/2023 at 15:39, MDM said:

 

If you have a day or so to spend you could always read through the following gigantic forum thread from early 2020 on slide copying or you could just look at Page 1 and take the advice I gave at the beginning  to use the Nikon ES-1 slide copier with a macro lens. EDIT: The ES-1 is still available from Nikon UK or Amazon (cheaper).

 

I have a vague memory that you are or were a Nikon user which is advantagageous as you might not need additional adapters but you would need a macro lens if you don't have one. 

 

Yes, I do indeed use a Nikon... what I don't own is a macro lens. I have a set of extension tubes which I use when I need to do anything vaguely macro. Not sure if I would get away with using there or not.. clearly a macro lens would be the preferable option.

Edited December 23, 2023 by Matt Ashmore

[IKuzmin]

39 minutes ago, Matt Ashmore said:

clearly a macro lens would be the preferable option.

Resolution of modern glass and sensors is way higher than I have on my slides. In theory, it could be better with a macro lens, and when I copied with Canon EF 24-105/4L the ratio was not 1:1 but ~0.7:1. Nevertheless, I did not see any difference in detail/noise compared to 1:1 copies made with Canon EF 100/28L macro which I borrowed at one time. All were done at ISO=100, F=8.

Anyway, it seems that if you are in the UK you have something similar to the US Lens Rentals, e.g. https://lensesforhire.co.uk/product/nikon-z-mc-105mm-f2.8-vr-s

[MDM]

1 hour ago, Matt Ashmore said:

 

Yes, I do indeed use a Nikon... what I don't own is a macro lens. I have a set of extension tubes which I use when I need to do anything vaguely macro. Not sure if I would get away with using there or not.. clearly a macro lens would be the preferable option.

 

Difficult to say without trying it. If using the ES-1, there can be problems getting focus depending on how close the lens will focus but not insurmountable problems. A good non-macro lens might be fine. 

 

Assuming you are using an F-mount camera rather than Z series, If you can get hold of a 55mm Micro-Nikkor AIS lens secondhand then this is ideal - you just need an extension ring behind the lens and the ES-1. There were a lot of these available secondhand back in 2020 at reasonable prices - not sure now. These are some of the best macro lenses ever made - pin sharp across the field - this is really important. The other lens I've used is a Tamron 90 macro which is also excellent and probably available secondhand as well. The Nikon 105 F-mount macro was very disappointing - uneven across the field. 

 

Also not sure how this would work if you are using a DX rather than FX camera. There were custom F-mount solutions for DX cameras from Nikon a few years ago - again I've not neen keeping up with changes in the F-mount world. 

[Avpics]

On 21/12/2023 at 10:35, geogphotos said:

But then if I had waited until I know what I know now I wouldn't have yet started! 

The story of life.

[Avpics]

0150IDM.JPG - full serial is XL660, named Alphard.

0274IDM.JPG - Closest aircraft is not a Vanguard, but is a Boeing 727, with a 737 beyond.

3375IDM.JPG - Black Arrows display team, not Knights.

Edited December 23, 2023 by Avpics

[geogphotos]

36 minutes ago, Avpics said:

0150IDM.JPG - full serial is XL660, named Alphard.

0274IDM.JPG - Closest aircraft is not a Vanguard, but is a Boeing 727, with a 737 beyond.

 

 

Thanks 😃

[spacecadet]

On 23/12/2023 at 00:10, Matt Ashmore said:

 

Yes, I do indeed use a Nikon... what I don't own is a macro lens. I have a set of extension tubes which I use when I need to do anything vaguely macro. Not sure if I would get away with using there or not.. clearly a macro lens would be the preferable option.

I was on the low-to-no budget option so got a cheap (£35) Bowens Illumitran complete with bellows, a Sony A adapter ring and used an old enlarging lens, but I think word has got round and they are now rather expensive (£200+). You would get a decent used macro lens for that money now. There are some cheaper (£40) base units, and you could build your own wooden column if you're handy. Off eBay.

So that makes my post a bit short of useful then- "use something that used to be cheap but now isn't".

I now use a macro lens with the same setup. The advantage of a fixed rig is that it's quite quick to set up (if you don't know of it, the 'Tran has its own flash source), quick enough to do a scan on demand. If I had a spare ILC I'd probably leave it set up all the time.

Edited December 26, 2023 by spacecadet

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

but I think word has got round and they are now rather expensive (£200+)

Actually some may ask those prices but the bottom seems to have fallen out of the Illumitran market, more like mid to high ££ in forum parlance. It does depend upon whether it's all there but I think it's best to get a complete unit because it is a very compact way of supporting the camera and holds it in perfect alignment (once shimmed). Ideally it would come with the 35mm slide holder and the M39 (LTM) lens mount but otherwise M42 adapters are cheap and plentiful if bought with a BPM Univeral Bellows and you can go to practically any camera with them. The Nikon ES-1 is good also but fiddly, you can work faster with an Illumitran. It works best with a mirrorless camera because they have the clearance to move down the bellows and focus-peaking is great. As you say it can be left set up and it's ready to go. Personally if I only had 35mm to do I'd be tempted to take out the internals and mount a Cinestill CS-Lite in there permanently. The flash power is 4 stops too high but I know you know that, ND gels are required.