scanning film with sd quattro

Being new to this forum, i would like to say greetings first. I've shot several sigma cameras during the past years, including sigma dp1m, dp3m, dp2x, mostly in monochrome and have always been astounded by the advantage they give over conventional Bayer pattern cameras.

However.

For the past several months i got hooked on film and now i rarely touch my digitals...

My usual workflow is as follows - BW film -> Fuji X-E1 w/ macro -> dcraw linear 16 bit TIFF -> inverted in Silverfast Negafix or manually inverted and tweaked in PS. I usually make one shot scans for online use and 4 shots stitch for a 6x4.5 negative which I intend to print. By stitching 4 shots I think I can go as far as the grain structure of the film. That is, with Bayer quality. Intended printing size is up to 24" at 300dpi.

My question towards the technically minded people here:

1. How big would be the advantage of replacing the Fuji X-E1 with Sigma SD (H) Quattro?

2. How big is the importance of a quality macro optic. Sigma SA is surprisingly hard to find over here (in Europe), so I've narrowed my choices to Sigma 105/2.8 APO or something like Nikkor 55mm/2.8 AIS with adapters (Nikon F->M42, M42->SA).

3. Inverting negatives requires a linear raw file which can be inverted before gamma is applied. Is there any way to get a raw linear file from a Sigma? No option in SPP as far as I know. Since I am interested in Luminocity only, there might be third party converters that can do a decent job?

Thank you for your attention and replies.

Artem.

Artemka wrote:

<...>

My question towards the technically minded people here:

1. How big would be the advantage of replacing the Fuji X-E1 with Sigma SD (H) Quattro?

It would be higher resolution for sure, but if you are already stitching I don't know how much that would matter... I would think the colors would be better, especially if you profile the camera.

2. How big is the importance of a quality macro optic. Sigma SA is surprisingly hard to find over here (in Europe), so I've narrowed my choices to Sigma 105/2.8 APO or something like Nikkor 55mm/2.8 AIS with adapters (Nikon F->M42, M42->SA).

That would be pretty important but there should be a range of macros that would work.  The 70mm is quite good, the 105mm as you noted is good.  Maybe even the 50mm macro would work?  Not sure if that's too wide.

3. Inverting negatives requires a linear raw file which can be inverted before gamma is applied. Is there any way to get a raw linear file from a Sigma? No option in SPP as far as I know. Since I am interested in Luminocity only, there might be third party converters that can do a decent job?

You can get the data from a program called RawDigger.  But I'm not sure how usable the raw data would be for you, even in monochrome - since it's three layers how would you invert it, or use it once inverted?  You could possibly just use the top layer but it might be kind of noisy, that would be the main danger I could see.

Artemka wrote:

Being new to this forum, i would like to say greetings first. I've shot several sigma cameras during the past years, including sigma dp1m, dp3m, dp2x, mostly in monochrome and have always been astounded by the advantage they give over conventional Bayer pattern cameras.

However.

For the past several months i got hooked on film and now i rarely touch my digitals...

My usual workflow is as follows - BW film -> Fuji X-E1 w/ macro -> dcraw linear 16 bit TIFF -> inverted in Silverfast Negafix or manually inverted and tweaked in PS. I usually make one shot scans for online use and 4 shots stitch for a 6x4.5 negative which I intend to print. By stitching 4 shots I think I can go as far as the grain structure of the film. That is, with Bayer quality. Intended printing size is up to 24" at 300dpi.

My question towards the technically minded people here:

1. How big would be the advantage of replacing the Fuji X-E1 with Sigma SD (H) Quattro?

I don't know. I have never seen a Fuji digital camera.

2. How big is the importance of a quality macro optic. Sigma SA is surprisingly hard to find over here (in Europe), so I've narrowed my choices to Sigma 105/2.8 APO or something like Nikkor 55mm/2.8 AIS with adapters (Nikon F->M42, M42->SA).

I think the lens is very important. I am using the Olympus OM 80mm macro bellows lens with the sdQH and early results look very promising. This lens is specifically designed for digitising film. You need to find an equally good lens, with flat field at around half life size. I find f/8 is the best aperture to use.

I have only done 35mm B&W negs so far. I will try to find time to test the setup on 120 film soon.

3. Inverting negatives requires a linear raw file which can be inverted before gamma is applied. Is there any way to get a raw linear file from a Sigma? No option in SPP as far as I know. Since I am interested in Luminocity only, there might be third party converters that can do a decent job?

The sdQH, and soon the sdQ, can save DNG files. These can be bulk loaded into Adobe Camera Raw, so I can convert 30 or so images to monochrome positives in one go. If you are doing colour negs, you would of course skip the mono step.

Irfanview can also do bulk inversion, as an option in its comprehensive mass conversion section.

The grain is there.

Artemka wrote:

Being new to this forum, i would like to say greetings first. I've shot several sigma cameras during the past years, including sigma dp1m, dp3m, dp2x, mostly in monochrome and have always been astounded by the advantage they give over conventional Bayer pattern cameras.

However.

For the past several months i got hooked on film and now i rarely touch my digitals...

My usual workflow is as follows - BW film -> Fuji X-E1 w/ macro -> dcraw linear 16 bit TIFF -> inverted in Silverfast Negafix or manually inverted and tweaked in PS. I usually make one shot scans for online use and 4 shots stitch for a 6x4.5 negative which I intend to print. By stitching 4 shots I think I can go as far as the grain structure of the film. That is, with Bayer quality. Intended printing size is up to 24" at 300dpi.

My question towards the technically minded people here:

1. How big would be the advantage of replacing the Fuji X-E1 with Sigma SD (H) Quattro?

A multilayer sensor do not give in principle higher resolution. If you scan B/W you must get rid of the Demosaic. This should give you the same resolution as all RGB pixels are avaible w/O interpolation. In stead you must adjust the 2x2 color channels for minimum derivation. This depend on the light source while making a scan/picture with the Bayer cam. It should be best a flash light because of vibration and spectral distribution.

I think RT have the capability to adjust color channels w/o Demosaic

2. How big is the importance of a quality macro optic. Sigma SA is surprisingly hard to find over here (in Europe), so I've narrowed my choices to Sigma 105/2.8 APO or something like Nikkor 55mm/2.8 AIS with adapters (Nikon F->M42, M42->SA).

I am in the process to optimze the scanning of 6x7 negative from Neopan and Velvia. My UMAX Powerlook III is not up to the capabilities of the Neopan. So I decide to scan and stitch with a macro setup. This is also the plan for 8x10 which is useable with the Powerlook III. The setup is an old enlarger with a M42 bellow and a white LED A4-size light table. The best objective I found up to now for 1:2 are a lens from a microfiche reader. Sometimes you can found them cheap from a replacement stock. Alternative are the microphoto objectives with 25mm to 35mm from Canon or Minolta. Up to 1:1 the Sigma 2.8/50mm works perfect. I am not using a Foveon, instead a Sony NEX3N because it has live view and flip monitor, perfect on the enlarger stand and the resolution difference is compensated by the much higher speed processing nonSigma RAWs.

3. Inverting negatives requires a linear raw file which can be inverted before gamma is applied. Is there any way to get a raw linear file from a Sigma? No option in SPP as far as I know. Since I am interested in Luminocity only, there might be third party converters that can do a decent job?

Kalpanika seems the only option.

Thank you for your attention and replies.

Artem.

rf-design wrote:

Artemka wrote:

Being new to this forum, i would like to say greetings first. I've shot several sigma cameras during the past years, including sigma dp1m, dp3m, dp2x, mostly in monochrome and have always been astounded by the advantage they give over conventional Bayer pattern cameras.

However.

For the past several months i got hooked on film and now i rarely touch my digitals...

My usual workflow is as follows - BW film -> Fuji X-E1 w/ macro -> dcraw linear 16 bit TIFF -> inverted in Silverfast Negafix or manually inverted and tweaked in PS. I usually make one shot scans for online use and 4 shots stitch for a 6x4.5 negative which I intend to print. By stitching 4 shots I think I can go as far as the grain structure of the film. That is, with Bayer quality. Intended printing size is up to 24" at 300dpi.

My question towards the technically minded people here:

1. How big would be the advantage of replacing the Fuji X-E1 with Sigma SD (H) Quattro?

A multilayer sensor do not give in principle higher resolution. If you scan B/W you must get rid of the Demosaic. This should give you the same resolution as all RGB pixels are avaible w/O interpolation. In stead you must adjust the 2x2 color channels for minimum derivation. This depend on the light source while making a scan/picture with the Bayer cam. It should be best a flash light because of vibration and spectral distribution.

I think RT have the capability to adjust color channels w/o Demosaic

2. How big is the importance of a quality macro optic. Sigma SA is surprisingly hard to find over here (in Europe), so I've narrowed my choices to Sigma 105/2.8 APO or something like Nikkor 55mm/2.8 AIS with adapters (Nikon F->M42, M42->SA).

I am in the process to optimze the scanning of 6x7 negative from Neopan and Velvia. My UMAX Powerlook III is not up to the capabilities of the Neopan. So I decide to scan and stitch with a macro setup. This is also the plan for 8x10 which is useable with the Powerlook III. The setup is an old enlarger with a M42 bellow and a white LED A4-size light table. The best objective I found up to now for 1:2 are a lens from a microfiche reader. Sometimes you can found them cheap from a replacement stock. Alternative are the microphoto objectives with 25mm to 35mm from Canon or Minolta. Up to 1:1 the Sigma 2.8/50mm works perfect. I am not using a Foveon, instead a Sony NEX3N because it has live view and flip monitor, perfect on the enlarger stand and the resolution difference is compensated by the much higher speed processing nonSigma RAWs.

I used a NEX-5N for doing all my 35mm colour slides. The great advantage is the built in HDR feature, which helps with the very high contrast of slides.

But for silver negatives, you need much higher resolution than for colour, to retain the grain structure. That's why I went for the Quattro. A sony A7Rii would have been more convenient, but it costs more than twice as much as the sdQH.

3. Inverting negatives requires a linear raw file which can be inverted before gamma is applied. Is there any way to get a raw linear file from a Sigma? No option in SPP as far as I know. Since I am interested in Luminocity only, there might be third party converters that can do a decent job?

Kalpanika seems the only option.

Or DNG export from the camera.

Thank you for your attention and replies.

Artem.

Artemka wrote:

These images look very fine grained for 35mm!

The sax player is FP4 film and the landscape is Panatomic-X.

It is worth reading up on Grain Aliasing. Low resolution, whether in traditional printing or this digitizing, can make grain appear coarser.

So, as far as I understand, you don't bother with linear workflow, you simply invert the DNG and tweak the levels/curves?

Yup. No two negs are identical anyway. The black and white points vary a lot. And sometimes you do want areas of solid black (very rarely areas of solid white).

Artemka wrote:

rf-design wrote:

Artemka wrote:

Being new to this forum, i would like to say greetings first. I've shot several sigma cameras during the past years, including sigma dp1m, dp3m, dp2x, mostly in monochrome and have always been astounded by the advantage they give over conventional Bayer pattern cameras.

However.

For the past several months i got hooked on film and now i rarely touch my digitals...

My usual workflow is as follows - BW film -> Fuji X-E1 w/ macro -> dcraw linear 16 bit TIFF -> inverted in Silverfast Negafix or manually inverted and tweaked in PS. I usually make one shot scans for online use and 4 shots stitch for a 6x4.5 negative which I intend to print. By stitching 4 shots I think I can go as far as the grain structure of the film. That is, with Bayer quality. Intended printing size is up to 24" at 300dpi.

My question towards the technically minded people here:

1. How big would be the advantage of replacing the Fuji X-E1 with Sigma SD (H) Quattro?

A multilayer sensor do not give in principle higher resolution. If you scan B/W you must get rid of the Demosaic. This should give you the same resolution as all RGB pixels are avaible w/O interpolation. In stead you must adjust the 2x2 color channels for minimum derivation. This depend on the light source while making a scan/picture with the Bayer cam. It should be best a flash light because of vibration and spectral distribution.

I think RT have the capability to adjust color channels w/o Demosaic

I've tried processing with RPP (Raw Photo Processor), which claims it can take the Luminosity without Demosaic-ing it. The results are somehow inferior to using normally processed files in dcraw. When enlarged to 400% the RPP file shows jagged lines and blotches and is very inconsistent in quality. As I mentioned, I can sort of overcome it by stitching and ending up with higher res, but man, every time I see the micro detail of Foveon...

The issue in the flow w/o Demosaic ist that the luminace response form the RGB is different. This gives the noise. If the three, assuming 2 equal green sensitivities, channels are equalized the noise vanish.

I use an LED light panel as in your setup below. Masking the negative with a black frame to prevent flare and using a tripod/cable release gives me sharp images.

A further trcik for stitching is to use an school technical drawing table. There can fix the movement into two directions and make markings for the stitch.

2. How big is the importance of a quality macro optic. Sigma SA is surprisingly hard to find over here (in Europe), so I've narrowed my choices to Sigma 105/2.8 APO or something like Nikkor 55mm/2.8 AIS with adapters (Nikon F->M42, M42->SA).

I am in the process to optimze the scanning of 6x7 negative from Neopan and Velvia. My UMAX Powerlook III is not up to the capabilities of the Neopan. So I decide to scan and stitch with a macro setup. This is also the plan for 8x10 which is useable with the Powerlook III. The setup is an old enlarger with a M42 bellow and a white LED A4-size light table. The best objective I found up to now for 1:2 are a lens from a microfiche reader. Sometimes you can found them cheap from a replacement stock. Alternative are the microphoto objectives with 25mm to 35mm from Canon or Minolta. Up to 1:1 the Sigma 2.8/50mm works perfect. I am not using a Foveon, instead a Sony NEX3N because it has live view and flip monitor, perfect on the enlarger stand and the resolution difference is compensated by the much higher speed processing nonSigma RAWs.

3. Inverting negatives requires a linear raw file which can be inverted before gamma is applied. Is there any way to get a raw linear file from a Sigma? No option in SPP as far as I know. Since I am interested in Luminocity only, there might be third party converters that can do a decent job?

Kalpanika seems the only option.

Thank you for your attention and replies.

Artem.

DMillier wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Artemka wrote:

These images look very fine grained for 35mm!

The sax player is FP4 film and the landscape is Panatomic-X.

It is worth reading up on Grain Aliasing. Low resolution, whether in traditional printing or this digitizing, can make grain appear coarser.

So, as far as I understand, you don't bother with linear workflow, you simply invert the DNG and tweak the levels/curves?

Yup. No two negs are identical anyway. The black and white points vary a lot. And sometimes you do want areas of solid black (very rarely areas of solid white).

I used to have an Acer scanwit film scanner. The grain was terrible. I tried everything including replacing the scanning software but the results were awful. ISO 100 colour neg scanned like it was like ISO 10,000,000. Saw a review of the scanner that said this was because of grain aliasing, the native resolution was perfect for aliasing neg film. Slides were a little better but I get better results with a slide copier and a digital camera.

"Scanwit" sounds like a good insult.  "You are just acting like a scanwit."

Artemka wrote:

A multilayer sensor do not give in principle higher resolution. If you scan B/W you must get rid of the Demosaic. This should give you the same resolution as all RGB pixels are avaible w/O interpolation. In stead you must adjust the 2x2 color channels for minimum derivation. This depend on the light source while making a scan/picture with the Bayer cam. It should be best a flash light because of vibration and spectral distribution.

I think RT have the capability to adjust color channels w/o Demosaic

I've tried processing with RPP (Raw Photo Processor), which claims it can take the Luminosity without Demosaic-ing it. The results are somehow inferior to using normally processed files in dcraw. When enlarged to 400% the RPP file shows jagged lines and blotches and is very inconsistent in quality. As I mentioned, I can sort of overcome it by stitching and ending up with higher res, but man, every time I see the micro detail of Foveon...

The issue in the flow w/o Demosaic ist that the luminace response form the RGB is different. This gives the noise. If the three, assuming 2 equal green sensitivities, channels are equalized the noise vanish.

Could you please write your workflow to make a conversion this way?

The only way I tested some b/w shots was via dcraw. There is a command line option to generate un-demosaic linear tiff from raw. You get then a gray linear image with full resolution but with the filter effects of the bayer filter in front of the sensor,

Then you have to equalize the gray 2x2 underlying pattern which is the result of your exposure light source and the dye filters. To construct the equlization you have to exposure a master image with about 18%. This master image must be inverted so that you get 0.18/image_value. The inverted master image have be multiplied with every tiff to get the color pattern out of the gray image.

The link below describe the usage for a custom demosaic but the construction is similar.

http://therefractedlight.blogspot.de/2014/04/cook-your-own-raw-files-part-3-demosaic.html

The difference is that the author construct a bayer pattern image where you need an inverted equalization image. The second step by the author is the custom demosaic which is not needed for b/w. The layer operation is done PS but RT is also possible.

An issue is that hot pixels where not removed up to now. Possible that dcraw have an option to interpolate hot pixels and not demosaic at the same time. This what I remember from more than 2 years ago.

SDQH has more resolution and less artifacts than Fujifilm.

The new 70mm macro is the best lens for your purposes. Adapting Nikon glass is somehow frustrating.

Raw developers other than SPP are not optimal. There is no such thing as linear dng with Sigma cameras. The sensor produces a completely different kind of signal and you probably should use the 16bit TIFF output from SPP.

Why using film? You could achive better results by using just the SDQH.

Hornbrille wrote:

SDQH has more resolution and less artifacts than Fujifilm.

The new 70mm macro is the best lens for your purposes. Adapting Nikon glass is somehow frustrating.

I did all of mine with an adapted Olympus OM 80mm lens, originally designed for copying 35mm film. Once you get it set up, and adapted lens is no problem.

However, the 70mm would probably work very well. Has anyone seen one yet ?

Raw developers other than SPP are not optimal. There is no such thing as linear dng with Sigma cameras. The sensor produces a completely different kind of signal and you probably should use the 16bit TIFF output from SPP.

I used the DNG format output from the sdQH for all my B&W 35mm negs. It worked very well. I haven't tried colour negs with the Sigma.

Why using film? You could acheive better results by using just the SDQH.

Technically better, but not necessarily aesthetically better. They are different media.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Example Kodachrome slide using the sdQH in SFD mode. You wouldn't need SFD for negs, but the high contrast of slides demands some kind of HDR method.

Note in the full size crop that the grain and the dust on the film are well resolved. Grain aliasing is the big problem when copying film, especially B&W. You can't have too much resolution.

Exakta camera, 25mm Flektogon lens.

You can find examples of B&W negs copied with the sdQH in my posts to the Monochrome Photos threads.