Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-26-2020, 09:35 AM - 3 Likes   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,276
Pentax 6X7 transparencies duped with Pentax 645Z

This is my 1st attempt and reasonable care was used, but I can probably do a little better when everything is tightened up. The film was taken years ago with Pentax 6X7 and 75mm f4.5. Copied these on a light table using Pentax 645Z with A 120 macro. Even with levels it is hard to get everything parallel. Not bad for a first attempt. Any tips or comments appreciated
Thanks for looking,
barondla

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX 645Z  Photo 
03-26-2020, 09:51 AM - 2 Likes   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 564
One way to get it all lined up/square: put a mirror where your transparency will be, and in the same plane. Aim the camera at the mirror. When you can see the reflected image of the camera in the center of the viewfinder, everything is nice and lined up. You will still have to make sure the camera is not rotated about the alignment axis (i.e. the transparency is square in the frame).
03-26-2020, 10:06 AM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Quebec
Posts: 538
Often 120 films were returned uncut, all rolled up and taped. The last slides I took with a 67 camera were "Kodachrome 64", so that was a long time ago. The films remained curled for over 25 years and would have to be covered with a thin glass pane to remain flat for copying. Just my 2 cents ...

Regards,
Richard
03-26-2020, 04:44 PM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jimpurcell's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tucson
Photos: Albums
Posts: 57
I really appreciate you sharing this. Well done.

03-26-2020, 07:37 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,276
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by AstroDave Quote
One way to get it all lined up/square: put a mirror where your transparency will be, and in the same plane. Aim the camera at the mirror. When you can see the reflected image of the camera in the center of the viewfinder, everything is nice and lined up. You will still have to make sure the camera is not rotated about the alignment axis (i.e. the transparency is square in the frame).
Thanks for the mirror alignment trick. I will try that next time. Sounds a little like aligning reflector telescope optics.

---------- Post added 03-26-20 at 09:43 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by RICHARD L. Quote
Often 120 films were returned uncut, all rolled up and taped. The last slides I took with a 67 camera were "Kodachrome 64", so that was a long time ago. The films remained curled for over 25 years and would have to be covered with a thin glass pane to remain flat for copying. Just my 2 cents ...

Regards,
Richard
I remember some 120 transparencies coming back rolled up in fat rectangular boxes. This slide was sent in strips of 3. Used a Beseler 4x5 enlarger's 6x7 neg holder to hold it flat. Glass would be even better, but Newton rings can be tough to conquer.

---------- Post added 03-26-20 at 09:45 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by jimpurcell Quote
I really appreciate you sharing this. Well done.
Thanks. Hope you try this if there are transparencies around the house.

Thanks,
barondla
03-26-2020, 11:09 PM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 941
I should try something similar with the D (I'm guessing my best lens would be the 67 135 macro). I've tried a few attempts, but had a lot of problems with dust and keeping the film flat. Thanks for sharing.
4 Days Ago   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,136
How much detail are you getting out of this setup? Can you get enough to make a sharp 16 X 20 print? Most of the mid to lower priced film scanners just can't extract needed detail from slides, so the Z could be a nice option.
3 Days Ago   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,276
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by desertscape Quote
How much detail are you getting out of this setup? Can you get enough to make a sharp 16 X 20 print? Most of the mid to lower priced film scanners just can't extract needed detail from slides, so the Z could be a nice option.
This is the first image copied. Haven't printed anything yet. I will have to work with this more
before being able to answer your question.
Thanks,
barondla


Last edited by barondla; 3 Days Ago at 09:46 AM.
3 Days Ago - 1 Like   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 480
When photographing transparencies, contrast control is always the challenge.

I've tried it with a Bowens Illumitran (working from 35mm slides, of course) and exceeded the gamut of the camera without using the contrast control kit (which was an added feature on the Bowens, and basically reflected flat light onto the dupe using a 45-degree sheet of optical glass). But it's too fiddly to be productive compared with a film scanner. For 35mm slides, I would like to be productive--find a workflow that will let me blow through hundreds or even thousands of slides. I also bought a Nikon PB-6 bellows and slide duplicator, and mounted a 55mm Micro-Nikkor on it. Adapted to my Canon, this works well. Making it work for the 645Z would require some effort, though I think it could be done. I have a Pentacon bellows that could be adapted to the 645z, plus a Pentax 100/4 bellows lens that could be mounted in a P6 body cap. Building the slide holder would be the hard part. But since none of my 35mm slides really stand up to 16x20 enlargements anyway, it's not worth the trouble.

For 67, though, I've been using my Nikon 9000ED film scanner. I have few enough roll-film transparencies that I want to scan that the time require in the Nikon isn't that much of a problem. 16x20's from the Nikon are excellent, though I'm sure a drum scanner would do a bit better.

I built a mechanism to make tiled scans of 4x5 negatives as a winter project a few years ago, using lab-grade precision slides and a screw platform to use as a focuser. The challenge is the light source, which must be absolutely even. And each image also has to be corrected for vignetting, which even the best macro lens will exhibit, and even slight vignetting will be visible in the tiles. And the alignment has to be within a print pixel. Using that arrangement, I can scan a 4x5 negative in 30 tiles of 22 megapixels each, so it's a challenge for the computer to process the tiles. It has remained idle just because of that. Some took that idea much further, creating XY control systems to move the negative precisely for an automated setup. But processing the tiles is still the challenge. (I use an Epson V750 scanner for 4x5, and it is adequate for making 16x20 prints, but I am assured there is more that could be done with a better scanner, even at that print size.)

A copy stand and a light box might be all you need for a 645z with a 120mm Macro lens, and the copy stand (if it's a good one) will help with alignment. But you have to adjust alignment visually--bubble levels lack the precision to get this right. I have the copy stand and the light box, but I also have the Nikon scanner

Rick "thinking you should be able to get everything a 16x20 needs if you can precisely control contrast" Denney
3 Days Ago   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 941
I'm looking at the Novoflex film copier (needs an additional Novoflex focussing rail making the setup not cheap): Slide duplicator CASTEL-COP-DIGI - NOVOFLEX Präzisionstechnik GmbH

Anybody tried it or something similar?

I could fashion a copy stand out of one of my tripods that allows hanging the camera under the centre column, but that it seems would be time consuming.
3 Days Ago   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,276
Original Poster
Contrast has always been a problem when copying. Years ago there was a special flat piece of Photo Gray glass that a 35mm slide was laid upon and expised to light. This added density to the highlights and reduced contrast. It was finicky but seemed to work for printing on Cibachrome. Think it was manufactured by BAT Color.

Many people use enlargers as copy stands. Replace lamphead with camera body and locate light source on easel. This prevents using the camera's macro lens. But, my Beseler 4x5 enlarger has a Nikkor 135 enlarging lens. Wonder which lens is sharper?

I remember in the Hama accessory catalog a neat gizmo. It was a bright light that attached to the camera viewfinder. This projected the viewfinder on to the ruled copy board. It was supposed to help setup and position the photo to be copied. Hama is gone but it wouldn't be that difficult to turn a LED flashlight into one of these.

Thanks,
barondla
3 Days Ago - 1 Like   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 480
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Contrast has always been a problem when copying. Years ago there was a special flat piece of Photo Gray glass that a 35mm slide was laid upon and expised to light. This added density to the highlights and reduced contrast. It was finicky but seemed to work for printing on Cibachrome. Think it was manufactured by BAT Color.

Many people use enlargers as copy stands. Replace lamphead with camera body and locate light source on easel. This prevents using the camera's macro lens. But, my Beseler 4x5 enlarger has a Nikkor 135 enlarging lens. Wonder which lens is sharper?

I remember in the Hama accessory catalog a neat gizmo. It was a bright light that attached to the camera viewfinder. This projected the viewfinder on to the ruled copy board. It was supposed to help setup and position the photo to be copied. Hama is gone but it wouldn't be that difficult to turn a LED flashlight into one of these.

Thanks,
barondla
I think you'll find that the enlarging lens is not better than the macro lens, if the macro lens has floating elements. It will maintain optimization down to near 1:1, while enlarging lenses are not optimized for 1:1, but rather for enlargements of 4-10x.

The Illumitran device didn't add density to the highlights, but rather raised the shadow detail by controlled flashing of the image, similar to flashing a negative. The problem I had was that it worked too well, and I had to expand the resulting image too much, which posterized the noise. I needed a neutral-density filter to reduce the effect of the CCU, but then I got the Nikon bellows that would adapt to my Canon and that was all I needed. I use the Canon flash onto a white card behind the opal glass, which is behind the slide, and let the automatic flash take care of the rest.

It's one reason I prefer negatives--a greater range of subject brightness contained in a narrower range of density on the film, because it is not designed to look realistic on direct viewing.

But a 6x7 Velvia transparency on a light table is a wondrous sight.

Rick "who used to sandwich gray transparency material with 4x5 transparencies to keep people from seeing the detail in the viewing room through the highlights" Denney
3 Days Ago - 3 Likes   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 480
QuoteOriginally posted by johnha Quote
I'm looking at the Novoflex film copier (needs an additional Novoflex focussing rail making the setup not cheap): Slide duplicator CASTEL-COP-DIGI - NOVOFLEX Präzisionstechnik GmbH

Anybody tried it or something similar?

I could fashion a copy stand out of one of my tripods that allows hanging the camera under the centre column, but that it seems would be time consuming.
That's sort of a hip, portable, flexy version of what I was describing for "scanning" large-format negatives, which is neither hip, portable, nor flexy.

Here's what I wrote about it after building it: DSLR Scanner: Camera Supports and Positioning

I built it to allow scanning a very large negative at high resolution, but never really figured out the light source. But for a one-shot photo on a 645z of a 67 piece of film, it would be much easier to use.

Rick "but not at all easy to build" Denney
Attached Images
 
3 Days Ago   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,276
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
That's sort of a hip, portable, flexy version of what I was describing for "scanning" large-format negatives, which is neither hip, portable, nor flexy.

Here's what I wrote about it after building it: DSLR Scanner: Camera Supports and Positioning

I built it to allow scanning a very large negative at high resolution, but never really figured out the light source. But for a one-shot photo on a 645z of a 67 piece of film, it would be much easier to use.

Rick "but not at all easy to build" Denney
Cool device!
Thanks for sharing,
barondla
2 Days Ago   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 941
QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
That's sort of a hip, portable, flexy version of what I was describing for "scanning" large-format negatives, which is neither hip, portable, nor flexy.

Rick "but not at all easy to build" Denney
That looks a very well built piece of kit (particularly like the bulldog* clips). How does the workflow go - does every shot need it's own specific exposure tweaking or can you nail several once you've found a sweet spot?

* Insert your local name for these wonderful clips - I'm sure there's a plethora of different ones from around the world.

Update: I've just read the linked article - fascinating attention to detail - thank you very much!

Last edited by johnha; 2 Days Ago at 09:32 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, 6x7, alignment, attempt, camera, films, glass, medium format, mirror, pentax, pentax 6x7 transparencies, pm, time, transparencies, transparency
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale: Pentax 6x7 300mm F4.0, 6x7 200mm F4.0, 645-A 200mm F4.0 MightyMike Photographic Equipment for Sale 13 5 Days Ago 05:50 PM
Copying transparencies to digital - best technique? pentaxmz Photographic Technique 14 05-02-2013 11:06 PM
Anyone used DR5 lab for B&W transparencies? LightMeter Pentax Medium Format 3 10-08-2011 07:02 PM
Problems with scanning transparencies on Epson V700 luckyslxty Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 20 08-19-2010 05:33 AM
Transparencies Aaron1971 Photographic Technique 3 12-30-2008 07:19 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:12 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top