Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

biz-engineer · 12-12-2021, 04:05 AM - **2 Likes**

Maybe this is the wrong forum section , but I haven't found a large format section.

You Tube

Using a scanner as a camera back! Pretty smart idea.

Could an EPSON V600 or V800 used as camera back?

**Digitalis** · 12-12-2021, 05:22 AM - **1 Like**

Scanning digital backs have been around for a while, albeit they came at a considerable cost back in the day (but they weren't anywhere near as expensive as single shot backs were). Using a consumer product for process it wasn't intended for will experience unexpected results. For instance scanner sensors often have extended IR sensitivity as that is one of the methods used for automatic dust and scratch removal..

Abbazz · 12-12-2021, 05:31 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Using a scanner as a camera back! Pretty smart idea.

Could an EPSON V600 or V800 used as camera back?

An Epson scanner could maybe be used but there are a few issues: this kind of scanner needs an external power source and a computer to operate so the whole setup would be quite bulky and difficult to operate on the field. The portable scanner used in the above video operates on batteries and scans to a memory card.

If you are interested in large format digital photography, you could check the Dicomed Better Light scan backs.

Cheers!

Abbazz

**Michail_P** · 12-12-2021, 07:06 AM

That’s actually really interesting! I would get used to the grainy photos, but would it be worth the time? Seems like it requires certain compromises.

**BigMackCam** · 12-12-2021, 08:29 AM - **1 Like**

This is essentially how the CMOS sensor in a digital camera works, isn't it? It scans... albeit by stepping through a matrix of photosites, whereas the desktop scanner moves the photosites electro-mechanically... and much more slowly

photoptimist · 12-12-2021, 08:47 AM - **1 Like**

I've seen a number DIY conversions of scanners into cameras such as https://www.sentex.ca/~mwandel/tech/scanner.html.

Older scanners typically used a single lens (focal length of about 60mm f/4) and a modest-sized linear array sensor about 2" to 3" of inches long. The challenge with adapting these scanner sensors to the back of a standard film camera is the registration distance. The sensor surface is maybe 2-3mm behind the front of the glass-covered chip. If the sensor were mounted at the film plane, the lens or mount would need perhaps 3-4mm shaved off of it to get infinity focus. Or, long-register lenses (e.g., medium format lenses) could be adapted to a short-register body with the needed 3-4mm removed in the adapter.

However, I took apart a newer Canon LiDE scanner that had a very different construction. It had a sensor-lens bar the full width of the page with 15 naked linear array chips mounted end-to-end that sat under a plastic bar that had an embedded linear array of about 600 fiber-optic gradient index lenses (each lens had a focal length of about 1 or 2 mm). Such a scanner could be fairly easily adapted as a scanning back on a large format camera although is might vignette pretty badly if off-axis rays from the camera lens don't couple nicely with the acceptance angle of the fiber-optic lenses.

**MossyRocks** · 12-12-2021, 04:42 PM

I have looked into such things a few times as every once and a while I see a neat article on one. If you look around you can find people who build large format camera backs from old flat bed scanners. Some work better than others. A common issue is the need for the sanner used to be support by the Linux SANE scanner interface. It was probably close to 15 years ago when I ran across the first one and was there were some great writeups at thattime on creating one. I can't find them now but one that a vaguely remember seeing at one point is this one. with a bit of looking I also found this one from years ago that I also remember looking at. In continuing the search I did find this which may or may not prove useful for you. I think this may be the first one I came across but I could be wrong.

I have thought about building one but also make it so that it scans a spacial image but also scans a temporal image (slit scanner/camera) as that also is something that intrigues me.

biz-engineer · 12-12-2021, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

This is essentially how the CMOS sensor in a digital camera works, isn't it? It scans... albeit by stepping through a matrix of photosites, whereas the desktop scanner moves the photosites electro-mechanically... and much more slowly

Yep, instead of a shutter slit moving over a sensor, it's the sensor that moves across the frame, albeit at a much slower speed.There are some commercial versions of scanning backs, although I'm not sure how many of those companies are still alive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scan_back
I haven't used a document scanner for a long time, except the ones that are now part of office copiers, but if I remember correctly A4 sized document scanners were inexpensive and I was impression by the PPI resolution at the time I used them.

trixtroll · 12-16-2021, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Yep, instead of a shutter slit moving over a sensor, it's the sensor that moves across the frame, albeit at a much slower speed.There are some commercial versions of scanning backs, although I'm not sure how many of those companies are still alive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scan_back
I haven't used a document scanner for a long time, except the ones that are now part of office copiers, but if I remember correctly A4 sized document scanners were inexpensive and I was impression by the PPI resolution at the time I used them.

I’ve got zero large format experience, but I’ve read up on it a few times over the years and that Wikipedia article raises some questions.

1) Wouldn’t the long exposure times be a limiting factor in what subjects you shoot (compared to say 400 speed sheets)?

2) The Wikipedia entry is a bit dated, but it says “Another downside is that most of these backs have to be used tethered to a computer. One reason is that there would be no other way to know when critical focus has been achieved.”

I’d think you’d still focus using the ground glass, then mount the scanning back, and finally remove the dark slide. Right?

biz-engineer · 12-16-2021, 06:11 AM

Originally posted by trixtroll

I’d think you’d still focus using the ground glass, then mount the scanning back, and finally remove the dark slide. Right?

I think it works the way you describe. Usable to static subjects, but scanning is a cheap way to get super resolution, especially for wide angle images where image stitching from rotating head doesn't work well. Although I've been inspired by scanning using my full frame camera and cropping a thin vertical slice in the center of the frame, scanning with the camera, and I discovered that doing so makes the stitching process robust to parallax errors (on rotating camera).

trixtroll · 12-16-2021, 10:40 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by biz-engineer

I think it works the way you describe. Usable to static subjects, but scanning is a cheap way to get super resolution, especially for wide angle images where image stitching from rotating head doesn't work well. Although I've been inspired by scanning using my full frame camera and cropping a thin vertical slice in the center of the frame, scanning with the camera, and I discovered that doing so makes the stitching process robust to parallax errors (on rotating camera).

Interesting..... I guess I photograph too many things that aren't quite static enough for a long exposure. Tree branches on a windy day would ruin that solution for me.

I have a feeling 4x5 is in my future, so this peaked my interest.

12-12-2021, 08:47 AM - 1 Like	#6
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,129	I've seen a number DIY conversions of scanners into cameras such as https://www.sentex.ca/~mwandel/tech/scanner.html. Older scanners typically used a single lens (focal length of about 60mm f/4) and a modest-sized linear array sensor about 2" to 3" of inches long. The challenge with adapting these scanner sensors to the back of a standard film camera is the registration distance. The sensor surface is maybe 2-3mm behind the front of the glass-covered chip. If the sensor were mounted at the film plane, the lens or mount would need perhaps 3-4mm shaved off of it to get infinity focus. Or, long-register lenses (e.g., medium format lenses) could be adapted to a short-register body with the needed 3-4mm removed in the adapter. However, I took apart a newer Canon LiDE scanner that had a very different construction. It had a sensor-lens bar the full width of the page with 15 naked linear array chips mounted end-to-end that sat under a plastic bar that had an embedded linear array of about 600 fiber-optic gradient index lenses (each lens had a focal length of about 1 or 2 mm). Such a scanner could be fairly easily adapted as a scanning back on a large format camera although is might vignette pretty badly if off-axis rays from the camera lens don't couple nicely with the acceptance angle of the fiber-optic lenses. Last edited by photoptimist; 12-12-2021 at 09:02 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Scanner Recommendations?	rvandenbrink	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	07-01-2021 01:35 PM
Windows 7 Drivers to import Q 7 files using Windows Scanner/Camera Wizard	CWRailman	Pentax Q	0	05-17-2015 01:56 PM
Digitization Method: Scanner or Camera with Slide Copier?	unixrevolution	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	11	01-23-2012 12:02 AM
Anyone using Canon 9000f scanner?	MattC	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	9	02-02-2011 12:50 PM
scanner camera	Steve Beswick	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	02-14-2010 11:32 AM

12-12-2021, 05:22 AM - 1 Like	#2
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,695	Scanning digital backs have been around for a while, albeit they came at a considerable cost back in the day (but they weren't anywhere near as expensive as single shot backs were). Using a consumer product for process it wasn't intended for will experience unexpected results. For instance scanner sensors often have extended IR sensitivity as that is one of the methods used for automatic dust and scratch removal..

12-12-2021, 05:31 AM	#3
Abbazz Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Jakarta Posts: 667	Originally posted by biz-engineer Using a scanner as a camera back! Pretty smart idea. Could an EPSON V600 or V800 used as camera back? An Epson scanner could maybe be used but there are a few issues: this kind of scanner needs an external power source and a computer to operate so the whole setup would be quite bulky and difficult to operate on the field. The portable scanner used in the above video operates on batteries and scans to a memory card. If you are interested in large format digital photography, you could check the Dicomed Better Light scan backs. Cheers! Abbazz

12-12-2021, 07:06 AM	#4
Michail_P Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2019 Location: Kalymnos Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,006	That’s actually really interesting! I would get used to the grainy photos, but would it be worth the time? Seems like it requires certain compromises.

12-12-2021, 08:29 AM - 1 Like	#5
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,705	This is essentially how the CMOS sensor in a digital camera works, isn't it? It scans... albeit by stepping through a matrix of photosites, whereas the desktop scanner moves the photosites electro-mechanically... and much more slowly

12-12-2021, 04:42 PM	#7
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	I have looked into such things a few times as every once and a while I see a neat article on one. If you look around you can find people who build large format camera backs from old flat bed scanners. Some work better than others. A common issue is the need for the sanner used to be support by the Linux SANE scanner interface. It was probably close to 15 years ago when I ran across the first one and was there were some great writeups at thattime on creating one. I can't find them now but one that a vaguely remember seeing at one point is this one. with a bit of looking I also found this one from years ago that I also remember looking at. In continuing the search I did find this which may or may not prove useful for you. I think this may be the first one I came across but I could be wrong. I have thought about building one but also make it so that it scans a spacial image but also scans a temporal image (slit scanner/camera) as that also is something that intrigues me.

12-12-2021, 11:22 PM	#8
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,253 Original Poster	Originally posted by BigMackCam This is essentially how the CMOS sensor in a digital camera works, isn't it? It scans... albeit by stepping through a matrix of photosites, whereas the desktop scanner moves the photosites electro-mechanically... and much more slowly Yep, instead of a shutter slit moving over a sensor, it's the sensor that moves across the frame, albeit at a much slower speed.There are some commercial versions of scanning backs, although I'm not sure how many of those companies are still alive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scan_back I haven't used a document scanner for a long time, except the ones that are now part of office copiers, but if I remember correctly A4 sized document scanners were inexpensive and I was impression by the PPI resolution at the time I used them.

12-16-2021, 02:04 AM	#9
trixtroll Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 403	Originally posted by biz-engineer Yep, instead of a shutter slit moving over a sensor, it's the sensor that moves across the frame, albeit at a much slower speed.There are some commercial versions of scanning backs, although I'm not sure how many of those companies are still alive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scan_back I haven't used a document scanner for a long time, except the ones that are now part of office copiers, but if I remember correctly A4 sized document scanners were inexpensive and I was impression by the PPI resolution at the time I used them. I’ve got zero large format experience, but I’ve read up on it a few times over the years and that Wikipedia article raises some questions. 1) Wouldn’t the long exposure times be a limiting factor in what subjects you shoot (compared to say 400 speed sheets)? 2) The Wikipedia entry is a bit dated, but it says “Another downside is that most of these backs have to be used tethered to a computer. One reason is that there would be no other way to know when critical focus has been achieved.” I’d think you’d still focus using the ground glass, then mount the scanning back, and finally remove the dark slide. Right?

12-16-2021, 06:11 AM	#10
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,253 Original Poster	Originally posted by trixtroll I’d think you’d still focus using the ground glass, then mount the scanning back, and finally remove the dark slide. Right? I think it works the way you describe. Usable to static subjects, but scanning is a cheap way to get super resolution, especially for wide angle images where image stitching from rotating head doesn't work well. Although I've been inspired by scanning using my full frame camera and cropping a thin vertical slice in the center of the frame, scanning with the camera, and I discovered that doing so makes the stitching process robust to parallax errors (on rotating camera).

12-16-2021, 10:40 AM - 1 Like	#11
trixtroll Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 403	Originally posted by biz-engineer I think it works the way you describe. Usable to static subjects, but scanning is a cheap way to get super resolution, especially for wide angle images where image stitching from rotating head doesn't work well. Although I've been inspired by scanning using my full frame camera and cropping a thin vertical slice in the center of the frame, scanning with the camera, and I discovered that doing so makes the stitching process robust to parallax errors (on rotating camera). Interesting..... I guess I photograph too many things that aren't quite static enough for a long exposure. Tree branches on a windy day would ruin that solution for me. I have a feeling 4x5 is in my future, so this peaked my interest.