I'm still on High Sierra so I don't know what the Mojave Printers window looks like. If i had your problem, I'd delete the printer in the Printers window and let the system download a new driver. Hopefully it will offer you a choice of Air-Print or other drivers. Don't use Air-Print.
Just a guess, open Printers and Scanners in System Preferences and check that you are using the non-Air-Print driver.
Architect1776 wrote:
So your super duper d850 will remove dust and restore colour?
NOT.
Also after a certain point the grain in the film/slide can be over emphasized.
Have you ever used a quality flatbed scanner with ICE etc?
By the time you clean up your super duper d850 copy the final product is not as good as an original quality scan.
I have a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED, with ICE of course. 4000 ppi compared to Nikon D850's 5849 ppi.
It is painfully slow when doing highest res multiple pass 16 bit plus ICE, and it needs VueScan (excellent) or other non Nikon SW to operate with current systems.
VueScan will process camera generated files to restore faded colors nicely, and for critical large print work, ICE dust & scratch removal is inadequate. It induces softness and you can see its tracks. So I end up manually retouching in Ps anyway.
I have not used the latest flatbeds, I have an Epson Perfection 3200 that's semi-adequate for roll film, but not useable for large print scans from 35mm.
Using a Laowa 25mm 2.5x-5x extreme macro lens, a D850 can produce a "scratch your eye" sharp 1142 megapixel image from a 35mm slide or negative.
Film grain and dye clouds are the brushstrokes of photography. Fuzzy them up if you must, I like 'em sharp.
Architect1776 wrote:
Scanners are slow but infinitely better and if you take time to PS all the dust and flaws out after using a duplicator you most likely spent less total time with the scanner and a better final product.
PS while scanning I set up the next holder for the scan and do other things so I am not just sitting watching the scanner (Like watching grass grow) and getting other things accomplished.
Not true, if using best current DSLRs and lenses.
Unless maybe talking about fluid mounted drum scans.
If you are going for maximum IQ, like for very large prints, I'd suggest focus and exposure bracketing.
Slides are not flat in their mounts, so focus bracketing will handle the curvature at the edges if you stack the shots.
Exposure bracketing will give you the option of HDR or simply picking the best exposure to cover the brightness range of the slide film.
Electronic first curtain release in Live View ("Silent Shutter in Canons) will eliminate vibration from mirror and shutter.
Be wary of LED light sources that don't have detailed color specifications. If only color temperature(˚K) is spec'd the Color Rendering Index CRI is likely low, and even LEDs with CRI of 90 or more can be weak in some important colors.
See:
https://www.waveformlighting.com/high-cri-ledI've been doing a bunch of extreme macro work at up to 10X, and in the process have acquired an unneeded StackShot computerized focusing rail. I think I might set it up as a digitizing station. I've got a 75 APO Rodagon D 1:1, Canon bellows with slide holder & EOS adapter, and Helicon software that will automate the focus and exposure bracketing, and even dustmap the camera sensor and retouch those spots automatically.
Video Games - Do some time-lapse self-portraits of yourself playing video games for an hour. Put the camera under the middle of your monitor and have it automatically take a shot every minute.
Combine all 60 images, making a giant "contact sheet", and get a cheap online giant inkjet print to hang on your wall and remind you what a waste of life video games are.
RWR wrote:
If there is any slop at all, I would not even think of using it. I always had my slide film processed only if I sent it out, and mounted them myself in anti-Newton ring glass mounts. There can be some variation among different depth-of-field tables, but the Leica table I use says for 1:1 it’s 0.79mm @ f/5.6, 1.09mm @ f/8.0 and 1.50mm @ f/11.0.
Thanks for the spec. I just measured the wiggle in my Nikon ES-2. Holding the device as it would be mounted on a lens, I pushed gently down to take out the play. The top v.s bottom length differs by a half a millimeter fully collapsed and about 2/3 of a millimeter when fully extended. I would only use this device if mounted vertically, to maintain parallelism.
I have found online, cheap metal screw-in lens hoods with filter threads front and rear. They come in wide, normal, and tele depths and sizes up to at least 77mm. Combined with sets of step-up & step down rings, you can configure any amount of non vignetting extension to mount the ES-2 on any macro lens.
BTW, I don't like the amount of wiggle in the sliding portion of the ES-2 any worry that it might be as parallel as desired for high resolution work.
Anybody know the diffraction limited f/stop and depth of field for the Nikon 105 on a D850? And will that cover the film curvature in a cardboard mounted slide?
Or would a two or three shot focus stack be better for critical reproduction (short of unmounting the slide)
A cheap set of step-up and step down filter adapters should let you cobble together enough extension to position the ES-2 at the correct distance for the 105mm.
Flash Gordon wrote:
Hi Brent,
Your setup looks like what I would like to try. I tried to print a picture of your setup with no luck. In down load the pic is cut off making it unusable. Is this some kind of copyright issue. Will you send me copies of the two photos so I can duplicate your setup? Maybe with dimensions. My camera is a Canon T5i with the kit lenses 18-55 and 55-250. I also have a 50mm f/1.4 prime and a 85mm f/1.8 prime. In addition I have a set of Kenko extension tubes. Hopefully I will be able to copy some of the many slides I took forty some years ago.
Thanks in advance,
Flash Gordon
aka Paul Weakley
pwseapa45@gmail.com
Hi Brent, br Your setup looks like what I would li... (
show quote)
I'm afraid none of those lenses will produce a sharp-all-over image of your slides. What is important is that the lens have a "flat field of focus", meaning everything in one plane is in focus at the same focus setting. True macro lenses do this, but general purpose lenses do not. A used 50, 60, or 90mm Macro would not be expensive, and could be resold if you don't find yourself wanting it for other uses.
Because you have sooo many slides to digitize, handling time becomes all important. And because you will probably only print a tiny fraction of that number, you can deal with dust on just the "keepers".
A Carrousel projector holds 140 slides in trays or around 40 in the stack loader. The lens comes right out and once you set everything up, the autofocus macro lens, working at f/11 or so and the camera at base ISO, you can let the camera pick the shutter speed for each slide, and AEB too, if Rebels do that.
Use a 180 or 200mm Macro lens on a crop sensor body, and a slide projector without lens.
The crop sensor will let you shoot the slides with no borders, or even tighter.
The slide projector will do the slide handling and lighting.
Much faster than any scanner!
boblacour wrote:
This is the most helpful comment/review I've seen on this forum in a long while. Great job !
Thanks boblacour, let's hope the OP reads it.
Dik wrote:
Can you imagine either Coke or Bacardi using this photo for an ad? I don't think so.
How many shots did you take to get this far?
How many times did you show the shot to someone and then reshoot, with improvements?
Reshoot before submitting!
Use the longest lens you have in order to get the maximum working distance. The perspective will be better, (tops and bottoms will be closer to parallel).
Make sure your camera is square to the back edge of the background or your background horizon and your liquid horizons won't match (that's a problem in your shot).
Lower the camera so the center of the lens is at the same height as the word "Bacardi", then tilt the camera up enough to encompass the view desired, and straighten the verticals in PP.
Rotate the Coke bottle so Coke is centered.
Move the Coke bottle to the right of the Bacardi so the picture reads as Bacardi & Coke, rather than Coke & Bacardi. Keep part of the Coke bottle behind the Bacardi bottle.
If you can get part of the Coke label to read through the rum, that would be great.
Prep the Coke bottle so that it looks cold. Mask the bottle at the liquid line, then spray light coats of matte lacquer or dulling spray until the bottle looks lightly frosted. After it dries, use an eyedropper to apply Karo clear syrup to simulate large water drops on the bottle, and a fine mist spray of water just prior to shooting will complete the "cold look".
Adding a few ice chips and some condensation runoff at the bottom of the Coke bottle would be worth another grade upgrade.
Position the shot glass in front of and covering parts of both bottles.
Instead of the plain white background wall, I would print a black to white gradient on matte paper and use that, white at the top. The reflection will be light in front and dark in back, concealing the horizon line.
Can you imagine either Coke or Bacardi using this ... (
show quote)
I just noticed the texture in the two bottles. The rum bottle will benefit greatly from black cards placed in front of the background, leaving only enough white to fill the camera frame, That will thicken the lines at the sides of the bottle, and bring out some texture. I'd have to see the Coke bottle in its new position to advise on it.
BTW, you might want to add focus stacking to the mix.
You should be able to do all the above in less than an hour. Don't say there's not enough time to improve...