Reading mode: Light Dark

Slide Copying

Go to last post
TAM63 said:
A friend of mine has about 1000 images, mostly slides, for a family archive project. She sent them out to a service, that did the most amazingly bad job I can imagine - 1 out of 5 missing, many cut off, not to mention color casts etc. And all out of order. So fairly unusable.

I've volunteered to try to fix this/do it over. Probably the latter. So I would have something between 200 and 900 slides to scan I would estimate.

I have a flatbed scanner, but that would be so inconvenient for me the way my house is set up, I don't think that'

s the way I want to go.

I'm looking at the possibility of using my DSLR and the Nikon ES-1.

What I have that may be useful here:

D810
Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 ais micro-nikkor
SB-700, remote cable, triggers, etc.

Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR

Tripod

Light stands

Ancient light table

Lightroom
Photoshop

So if I am understanding correctly, all I would need to purchase would be the ES-1 and a PK-13 extension tube.

I've seen people say to use the flash, or point it at the monitor with a bright screen, or even an overcast sky (I'm not doing that last one). Any thoughts welcome.

One thing I'm wondering - she has slides with 3 different sizes / aspect ratios (photo below) - is this going to present any problem to me with the ES-1?

Any insights welcome - Thanks!

be53a4b1bd074a35a5e9e2783fc71486.jpg
Click to expand...
I copied my slides following the procedure described here:

http://www.throughthefmount.com/articles_tips_digitise.html

I copied the slides with a Nikon D750,

Nikon Slide Copying Adapter ES-1,

Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 lens,

PK-13 27.5 mm AI Extension tube,

SB-800 flash unit and a cable attached to the camera and the flash.

Before copying slides I had a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400. Despite Digital ICE, etc., the D750 slide copies were a lot cleaner. Personally I prefer Photoshop over Light room for post-processing.

With the extension tube I believe it's possible to adjust and focus slides in the DLSR viewfinder with different aspect ratios.

[edited]

If using the D810 you'll want to set ISO to 64 to take full advantage of the D810's dynamic range.
 
Last edited:
Leonard Migliore said:
greenpoe said:
I copied my slides following the procedure described here:

http://www.throughthefmount.com/articles_tips_digitise.html

I copied the slides with a Nikon D750,

Nikon Slide Copying Adapter ES-1,

Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 lens,

PK-13 27.5 mm AI Extension tube,

SB-800 flash unit and a cable attached to the camera and the flash.
Click to expand...
Did you use i-TTL for exposure or did you use manual flash?
Click to expand...
I have used manual flash. As long the slides is correct exposured, the same setting on the flash works with all slides. My experience is that the automatic in i-TTL gives some varians, so I prefer it manual. And as long the digitizing is the same for all slides, it it easier to use the same settings for all raw-files.

I have used 55mm/3.5 on PB-4 bellows with the slide duplication adapter PS-4.
 
"Forgot to ask - for ones that are all the same, can I use some gaffer tape or something to lock things in place so I don't need to refocus all the time? And should I be able to get away with keeping exposure constant, with enough latitude in the RAW to correct in LR?

Gathering you are not recommending using the flash on TTL like some seem to be doing?"

Short answer: No. Long answer: If you sort the slides into groups that have come from the same processor, usually all the slides from the same lab will have a similar position in the cardboard frame. Different lab, different film stock: Focus usually shifts and you'll have to refocus. So, check focus often.

Note: The ES-1 is subject to rotational shifting and focus shift from handling, and you'll be handling it every time you change slides. Check the alignment of each slide after inserting it.

Also:

1. Usually, full average auto-exposure works fine with raw. I use 'A'.

2. Flash is great, except you need a constant light (modeling light) to focus. I had that setup for a while, and the constant switching between modeling light and flash was a big hassle.

Later I switched to tungsten...much less fiddly, the whole shoot goes faster.
 
Thank you everyone!

To summarize - the slides I am trying to digitize currently are old family snapshots. We don't have to have the absolute best quality possible, these weren't beautiful photos to start with. Just preserving the memories in reasonable quality, and reasonable amount of my time.

I decide to go with using my 55mm f/2.8 micro-nikkor and purchasing a ES-1 and a PK-13 extension tube. I got the extension tube used.

I decided I'd prefer to try a constant light source to using my flash, partly for the ease of focusing. So I'm going to try this light pad:

Loading…

www.amazon.com

I'll let you know how it goes.

One thing I'm struggling with a bit - how to tell which side of the slide to put towards the camera? My old eyeballs aren't really seeing a difference.... any hints?
 
TAM63 said:
One thing I'm struggling with a bit - how to tell which side of the slide to put towards the camera? My old eyeballs aren't really seeing a difference.... any hints?
Click to expand...
On Kodachrome, the emulsion side is fairly clearly different to the reflective side, but this is less obvious on other stock. If you try looking with tangential light, this can highlight smaller differences.

Other cues are which side the slide is bowing, and of course markers on the mounts which tend to be consistent, at least if they were done by a shop/service. Failing all of that, cues from slide content often works, including asymmetry in people and known buildings/landscape.

I once noticed a huge museum poster display of the temple of Ramesses II in Abu Simbel. Didn't have the heart to tell them it was the wrong way round, and in a way, who cares!
 
JohnnyLuddite said:
JohnnyLuddite said:
One thing I'm struggling with a bit - how to tell which side of the slide to put towards the camera? My old eyeballs aren't really seeing a difference.... any hints?
Click to expand...
On Kodachrome, the emulsion side is fairly clearly different to the reflective side, but this is less obvious on other stock. If you try looking with tangential light, this can highlight smaller differences.

Other cues are which side the slide is bowing, and of course markers on the mounts which tend to be consistent, at least if they were done by a shop/service. Failing all of that, cues from slide content often works, including asymmetry in people and known buildings/landscape.

I once noticed a huge museum poster display of the temple of Ramesses II in Abu Simbel. Didn't have the heart to tell them it was the wrong way round, and in a way, who cares!
Click to expand...
Thanks! Haha re. the temple.

I guess my next question is - does this really matter for this particular project? The owner has a mark on the 'front' of each slide, presumably showing the way it should face. Can I just reproduce them that way, and it will be good enough? or....? Remember, these are snapshots...
 
I have a Nikon LS-4000 that would be good for the normal sized slides - if it worked! 5 years ago I needed to do a slideshow of my mom's life, and I had slides back to the 1930's, including medium format in metal mounts.

With the LS-4000 down and a deadline approaching, I turned to the slide copying feature of my Epson 2400 flatbed. It came with a variety of slide holders, and it was able to do 6 slides at a time for regular sized slides. Did an OK job, better than I expected. Certainly ended up being faster than the Coolscan.
 
I think people will only notice when it's a familiar place and face. As long as you're consistent, you can then easily flip them all.

As an example, where I wasn't sure about mirror-imaging, I got to know which side of the face someone's mole actually was, and that gave a reference for a lot of shots they were in, and by cross-reference, a lot of other shots. I think along with the mount marks, that would be as good as you can get, and indeed, flipping the image is not a huge amount of work in comparison with color correction etc.
 
JohnnyLuddite said:
I think people will only notice when it's a familiar place and face. As long as you're consistent, you can then easily flip them all.

As an example, where I wasn't sure about mirror-imaging, I got to know which side of the face someone's mole actually was, and that gave a reference for a lot of shots they were in, and by cross-reference, a lot of other shots. I think along with the mount marks, that would be as good as you can get, and indeed, flipping the image is not a huge amount of work in comparison with color correction etc.
Click to expand...
Thanks!

I was a little unclear in my question though - if I just photograph them with her marks facing the camera, I suspect they will be facing the right way.

But - will that be the 'correct' side for best quality? Or does that even matter in this case?
 
TAM63 said:
Thanks!

I was a little unclear in my question though - if I just photograph them with her marks facing the camera, I suspect they will be facing the right way.

But - will that be the 'correct' side for best quality? Or does that even matter in this case?
Click to expand...
Yep, if photographing, it's as if it were mini-grandma or whoever there.

I think as long as you can focus on the grain, it doesn't make any significance difference to quality - the transmitted light has to go through the gel at some point anyway.
 
JohnnyLuddite said:
TAM63 said:
Thanks!

I was a little unclear in my question though - if I just photograph them with her marks facing the camera, I suspect they will be facing the right way.

But - will that be the 'correct' side for best quality? Or does that even matter in this case?
Click to expand...
Yep, if photographing, it's as if it were mini-grandma or whoever there.

I think as long as you can focus on the grain, it doesn't make any significance difference to quality - the transmitted light has to go through the gel at some point anyway.
Click to expand...
Thanks so mcuh!

One other question I thought of - as I'm trying to sort these things... if a year is stamped on the cardboard holding the slide - can I safely assume that is the year the slide was developed?

They have one set of slides where the year they say it was is a couple years later than the date stamped on the cardboard.
 
TAM63 said:
Thank you everyone!

To summarize - the slides I am trying to digitize currently are old family snapshots. We don't have to have the absolute best quality possible, these weren't beautiful photos to start with. Just preserving the memories in reasonable quality, and reasonable amount of my time.

I decide to go with using my 55mm f/2.8 micro-nikkor and purchasing a ES-1 and a PK-13 extension tube. I got the extension tube used.

I decided I'd prefer to try a constant light source to using my flash, partly for the ease of focusing. So I'm going to try this light pad:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y21WQYQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Click to expand...
As has been mentioned, LED sources typically have discontinuous spectra, which can affect color accuracy. But since you're coping old slides with lots of color shift anyway, it may not matter. At least you're getting lots of cold light.
TAM63 said:
I'll let you know how it goes.

One thing I'm struggling with a bit - how to tell which side of the slide to put towards the camera? My old eyeballs aren't really seeing a difference.... any hints?
Click to expand...
I just looked at some of my old slides with a magnifier and I can't tell either except for the one that have text on them...
 
TAM63 said:
JohnnyLuddite said:
I think people will only notice when it's a familiar place and face. As long as you're consistent, you can then easily flip them all.

As an example, where I wasn't sure about mirror-imaging, I got to know which side of the face someone's mole actually was, and that gave a reference for a lot of shots they were in, and by cross-reference, a lot of other shots. I think along with the mount marks, that would be as good as you can get, and indeed, flipping the image is not a huge amount of work in comparison with color correction etc.
Click to expand...
Thanks!

I was a little unclear in my question though - if I just photograph them with her marks facing the camera, I suspect they will be facing the right way.

But - will that be the 'correct' side for best quality? Or does that even matter in this case?
Click to expand...
The emulsion side should be facing the lens. Slides usually curl so the emulsion side is concave, which would make it better for staying in focus. But it probably won't make any difference in the results.
 
TAM63 said:
Thanks so mcuh!
Click to expand...
You're welcome - I feel your pain!
TAM63 said:
One other question I thought of - as I'm trying to sort these things... if a year is stamped on the cardboard holding the slide - can I safely assume that is the year the slide was developed?
Click to expand...
Yes, at least Kodachrome after about 1960 or so would put month and year printed on the mount.
TAM63 said:
They have one set of slides where the year they say it was is a couple years later than the date stamped on the cardboard.
Click to expand...
Well, one of them is dodgy because the processed date is going to be later than the taken date! Before getting hung up on this, perhaps wait till you have a reasonably complete sequence because people are normally good at remembering what event was before/after another, whereas they might get the date wrong - and in any case, for a slideshow or album kind of thing, all you really need is the sequence. If you have access to them, if they've been kept, sometimes old passport stamps can be very good for nailing some events. Likewise events like weddings normally establish a sequence and date well.
 
Leonard Migliore said:
TAM63 said:
Thank you everyone!

To summarize - the slides I am trying to digitize currently are old family snapshots. We don't have to have the absolute best quality possible, these weren't beautiful photos to start with. Just preserving the memories in reasonable quality, and reasonable amount of my time.

I decide to go with using my 55mm f/2.8 micro-nikkor and purchasing a ES-1 and a PK-13 extension tube. I got the extension tube used.

I decided I'd prefer to try a constant light source to using my flash, partly for the ease of focusing. So I'm going to try this light pad:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y21WQYQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Click to expand...
As has been mentioned, LED sources typically have discontinuous spectra, which can affect color accuracy. But since you're coping old slides with lots of color shift anyway, it may not matter. At least you're getting lots of cold light.
Click to expand...
It was very cheap, I'm going to try it. Someone elsewhere posted that they were having good luck with one. I do understand what you're saying, if it is giving me a problem, I'll go to a plan B.
Leonard Migliore said:
Leonard Migliore said:
I'll let you know how it goes.

One thing I'm struggling with a bit - how to tell which side of the slide to put towards the camera? My old eyeballs aren't really seeing a difference.... any hints?
Click to expand...
I just looked at some of my old slides with a magnifier and I can't tell either except for the one that have text on them...
Click to expand...
Great, then that's one less thing for me to worry about - thank you.
Leonard Migliore said:
--
Leonard Migliore
Click to expand...
 
JohnnyLuddite said:
TAM63 said:
Thanks so mcuh!
Click to expand...
You're welcome - I feel your pain!
JohnnyLuddite said:
One other question I thought of - as I'm trying to sort these things... if a year is stamped on the cardboard holding the slide - can I safely assume that is the year the slide was developed?
Click to expand...
Yes, at least Kodachrome after about 1960 or so would put month and year printed on the mount.
JohnnyLuddite said:
They have one set of slides where the year they say it was is a couple years later than the date stamped on the cardboard.
Click to expand...
Well, one of them is dodgy because the processed date is going to be later than the taken date! Before getting hung up on this, perhaps wait till you have a reasonably complete sequence because people are normally good at remembering what event was before/after another, whereas they might get the date wrong - and in any case, for a slideshow or album kind of thing, all you really need is the sequence. If you have access to them, if they've been kept, sometimes old passport stamps can be very good for nailing some events. Likewise events like weddings normally establish a sequence and date well.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Hopefully they will be able to figure it out. It's only one set thankfully.
 
The different size slides will cause problems. I have the ES-1 and it has an opening the size and shape of a 35mm slide. The large square slides will have a lot cut off the top and bottom and a little off each side. The 126 slides will have some of the top and bottom cut off.
 
StanJaz said:
The different size slides will cause problems. I have the ES-1 and it has an opening the size and shape of a 35mm slide. The large square slides will have a lot cut off the top and bottom and a little off each side. The 126 slides will have some of the top and bottom cut off.
Click to expand...
Gear just came.

The small square ones are working fine, there is room around all 4 sides.

I'm not going to find having anything cut off acceptable. If it's going to cut off those large ones, I'll just have to put them on the light table and do it w/o the ES-1 (on a tripod).

I'm not sure what 126 slides are, I guess I'm going to hope that I don't have any

Even at too high of an ISO (still handheld for this test) they are acceptably sharp I think. I suppose it would be better if I were to remove the dog hair I have now added to the slide, haha.

Thanks for all the help everyone - I'll put up a pic once I get some done for real.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Negative and Slide Scanning
Replies
8
Views
2K
RickKr
R
M
Question concerning Nikon ES-2 kit and compatible lenses.
Replies
2
Views
366
DeeJay53
D
S
  • Question Question
Slide copying with a 4/3 camera & macro lens
Replies
5
Views
429
Jack Calypso
J
RichDitch
Experience using the Nikon ES-1 35mm Slide Copying Adapter on N1?
Replies
10
Views
423
RichDitch
RichDitch
N
Scan old slides?
Replies
17
Views
785
PMB
P

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top