# Looking for slide/neg scanner that works on Linux, or slide/neg holder for macro lens



## Skaperen (Dec 20, 2010)

I'm in the market for a high quality slide and negative (film) scanner that will work on Linux.  I do not want any flatbed type scanners.  It should be a high quality dedicated slide and negative scanner.  An example of one is Plustek 7400 but this does not work on Linux.

My other option is to find a slide / negative holder that will fit to a macro lens (Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro with 52mm front thread) with the proper distance for the 1.6:1 focus (since it is reducing full frame film down to APS-C format sensor in the 450D I have).  A tri-color LED light source would be a nice addition.


----------



## Josh66 (Dec 20, 2010)

The Epson V600 & V700 (pretty sure any Epson scanner, actually) both work on Linux.

You'll need this:
Scanner | AVASYS CORPORATION

Just select the relevant model, distribution, etc, then install the packages.

They are flatbeds, but that's all I know of that works on Linux.

I used to have a PlusTek 7300, and there are no drivers for them.


Any particular reason you don't want a flatbed?

I've used both (flatbed and dedicated, 35mm only scanner) and I have not really noticed any difference in quality.  If anything, the flatbed is a little faster (and higher resolution).  Really, the only thing I don't like is that it takes up much more desk space...  But, oh well - I have it on a small file cabinet next to the desk (desk is already cluttered with other stuff, lol).

BTW - The flatbed is actually two scanners in one ... the scanner for the film is in the lid - much higher resolution than the one in the base used for documents.


----------



## Bynx (Dec 20, 2010)

You might want to look into the gyzmo that fits on the camera lens. It holds the slide and has a diffusing piece of white plastic on the end. Just point your camera at a light source (sky) and thats it. No need to worry about camera shake. It works much faster than any scanner.

http://specialtyphotographic.stores.yahoo.net/slcounpro.html?gclid=CLfKztyM_KUCFQjrKgodhi88pQ


----------



## Josh66 (Dec 20, 2010)

Bynx said:


> It works much faster than any scanner.


Only problem is that it's limited by the resolution of the camera.  Any film scanner is going to have _much_ higher resolution...  Mine can scan up to 9600ppi (which is way too high for my uses), and most go at least to 7200ppi (which is still higher than most people will really use on an everyday basis).

If high resolution isn't all that important, that would be something to look into though...


----------



## Bynx (Dec 20, 2010)

I also have a Film & Slide converter from Innovative Technology. It uses a 5 megapixel sensor which is less than my camera so I wouldnt recomment it. Its a hundred buck device which holds strips of film or single mounted slides. I prefer to use my camera and shoot them. That means with an 8 megapixel camera you should get excellent 11 x 17 size photos at 300 dpi.


----------



## Josh66 (Dec 20, 2010)

Something like that probably wouldn't be too hard to make if you had a macro lens already...  It does look interesting, but reading the description on the website, I get the impression that it's more geared towards P&S cameras or non-macro lenses on SLRs.

If you had a macro lens, all you would really need is something to hold it at the right distance.

I guess, if you had one of those tables where the top lights up, all you would really need is a table-top tripod.


If you don't need resolution higher than whatever your camera is, it does sound like a half-way decent alternative.  Certainly faster...

Film scanners are slow...


edit
Almost forgot - check here too:
http://www.sane-project.org/sane-mfgs.html


----------



## Orrin (Dec 21, 2010)

I solved the same problem by obtaining a cheap used XP laptop from a recycler just to use as a printer/scanner server for my Canon MP990.  A USB drive is used to get the images into the Linux system.


----------



## Skaperen (Dec 21, 2010)

Bynx said:


> You might want to look into the gyzmo that fits on the camera lens. It holds the slide and has a diffusing piece of white plastic on the end. Just point your camera at a light source (sky) and thats it. No need to worry about camera shake. It works much faster than any scanner.
> 
> Bower Pro Digital Slide Copier / Duplicator: Canon Fuji / Fujifilm HP JVC Kodak Minolta Nikon Olympus Panasonic Pentax Sharp Sigma Sony Copy Film Copiers Scanner<br>


The problem with this is that it has its own built in closeup lens, the kind you screw onto the front of ordinary lenses to get them closer.  It's closeup, but it's not macro.  That means the field is not flat, and not even coincident in all colors.  It cannot be removed without making it non-attachable to the lens.

I would prefer this approach if I could find such a device that had no optics so I can use a high quality macro lens directly.  Nikon used to make one and I used to have that back when I was making slide dups on film.  It fit in the bellows rail and was sized for the 55mm f/2.8 Nikkor macro.  I still have that 55mm lens, but that's all.  The bellows part eventually deteriorated and crumbled to pieces.  I threw the bellows out, but I'm sure I kept the rest (about 16 years ago).  But all I can find is the lens.


----------



## Skaperen (Dec 21, 2010)

O|||||||O said:


> Something like that probably wouldn't be too hard to make if you had a macro lens already...  It does look interesting, but reading the description on the website, I get the impression that it's more geared towards P&S cameras or non-macro lenses on SLRs.
> 
> If you had a macro lens, all you would really need is something to hold it at the right distance.


It would need something to attach to the 52mm lens front, be able to rotate, hold the film at the perfect angle (unless you want to create fake miniaturization narrow DoF ... but you can do that in software these days).  OK, even if it isn't perfectly perpendicular to the shooting angle, I can always do a focus stack.

A friend of mine owns a commercial machine shop.  Maybe we can come up with something if nothing else appears on the market.



O|||||||O said:


> I guess, if you had one of those tables where the top lights up, all you would really need is a table-top tripod.






O|||||||O said:


> If you don't need resolution higher than whatever your camera is, it does sound like a half-way decent alternative.  Certainly faster...
> 
> Film scanners are slow...


I'm not too worried about them being slow.  I am worried about the sliding sensor having some geometry jitter.  At least I know a camera sensor doesn't have a geometry issue, and the lens will be consistent in distortion from shot to shot.

Camera sensors have the disadvantage of being an array of pixels that have different colors, and it's all interpolated after the fact.  But the resolution is good enough to put my pictures on full screen in 1920x1200 displays.  I would still shoot for more just to have in case I want to crop.

And yes, I've got sane, xsane, gphoto2, dcraw, etc, on my Linux boxes.  gphoto2 will take and download pictures on my 450D/XSi with just a USB cable (played with that just last night).  I'm looking at moving up to a 7D or 5D by spring.


----------



## Josh66 (Dec 21, 2010)

Skaperen said:


> I'm not too worried about them being slow.  I am worried about the sliding sensor having some geometry jitter.  At least I know a camera sensor doesn't have a geometry issue, and the lens will be consistent in distortion from shot to shot.


I have scanned countless frames of film, and that has never been an issue for me.

Even if it was a possible issue, a dedicated 35mm only scanner like the PlusTek ones could possibly have the same problem.  The scanning sensor is still moving, it's just smaller.

But, like I said, it has never been an issue for me.
I do make it a point not to disturb the scanner while it's working though, just in case.


Finding Linux compatible film scanners was a pain in the ass for me too...  I settled with Epson because it was the best one I could find that worked.  It's not really a compromise though, because even if I wasn't limited to Linux compatible scanners - it's still one of the best on the consumer market.

All I had to do was install iScan (see the avasys link I posted earlier) and plug it in.


I couldn't find a free way to make my printer work though, and I didn't really want to buy a new one.  I had to buy this to get it working:
ZEDOnet | TurboPrint Linux | Printer driver for Linux

Ubuntu did recognize my printer (even though everything I've read said it shouldn't), but it wasn't able to use all of the features, and frankly - the prints looked like crap.  Everything looks perfect with TurboPrint.
It's about US$40, which is much less than I would have spent on a new printer.


----------



## Skaperen (Dec 23, 2010)

The ideal would be to have a high resolution MONOCHROME sensor, and use narrow band tri-color LED illumination.  When taking the scan, the LEDs will cycle through primary colors and record 3 or 6 images.  You won't even have to do cross color interpolation like most or all DSLR cameras do.

In the end, I think I'm going to work on finding some way to rig up a non-optical adjustable tube that can be attached to the front of a genuine macro lens, and mount film and slides.  I'll also look for or design some kind of narrow band tri-color LED light source.  In my case, everything I expect to scan is 35mm.  But other people might have reason to scan a wider range from old 110 film to large format so if it were to be made into a product, it might make sense to have attachable pieces.  It would start with lens attachments for various thread diameters.


----------

