How I Digitize/Scan Black and White Film Photos

When it came to scanning 1,042 medium format black and white film photos with the highest quality possible and least amount of time, using a digital camera with a macro lens was the best choice.
Camera used: Sony a7r iv
Lens: Sigma 70mm dg macro art
Lightbox: Cricut Brightpad (fine for black and white, not the best choice for color film. For color film, look for something with a 95 CRI rating or higher. I'd recommend any of the 95 CRI lights that Raleno makes)
#filmphotography #filmscanner #scanningfilm

[@imrannuri]

Quick 2023 update: The cricut light box is fine, but definitely not bright enough to allow for a high shutter speed which can minimize the risk of vibrations that can cause a blurry scan. I now use a light made by Raleno that I got from Amazon. It's bright enough where I can use a 1/200 shutter speed at f/8 aperture ISO 100 for scanning. Luckily when I scanned the images in this video for my series, Advice From America, the carpeted room and very heavy desk made it near impossible for vibrations, but I still wish I would have used a brighter light. Hindsight is 20/20. Happy scanning!

[@MrMitchFish]

This is exactly the content I need. Thanks for listing out the products you use, why you use them, specs, and how you achieved the final quality

[@imrannuri]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Ilegator]

Thank you very much for the video. I have a 21MP Canon camera with a macro lens. Do you think it could do a better job than a V750 pro?
And which lightbox would you recommend me for color film?

[@MattWeddis]

I think you’ve convinced me to use that method for scanning. Now, I just have to save up for the additional equipment I need and make sure I can wrangle 4x5 somehow.

[@imrannuri]

The results don't lie! I get very similar results from using the pixl latr holder but now that I have the negative supply 120 holder, I just use the pixl latr for scanning 35mm and 4x5

[@MattWeddis]

@@imrannuri I’m also looking at the ‘Essential Film Holder’. I’ve heard that they’re working on a version that also takes 4x5. I think it sits somewhere between pixel-latr and negative supply, in terms of cost and effectiveness.

[@mrmrmanman7845]

How about photos? I saw another video of yours, where you reviewed the epson v600. The digital camera photo scans were nice! But, what setup can one use? I only find tons and tons of videos describing how to scan negatives. Would love to find an example setup w/recommended equipment. I have a lot of old black and white photos from early 1900s. Also, products like epson also do corrections, but using a digital camera you would probably need photoshop, and everything seems a bit less accessible to regular people. Anyways, thanks for good videos!

[@vc6218]

How does this not defeat the purpose of Medium Format. Scanning a larger negative with a smaller sensor. Can someone please break down the science so I can get my lab going lol

[@arunavade2571]

You can use macro focus rails and a higher magnification ratio macro lens (like 2:1) to take multiple photos of different areas of the same negative. Then you just stitch them together in photoshop to get a very high quality scan.

[@imrannuri]

The way the image looks is not determined by the way you scan the negative. It's determined by the size of the film and the lens that takes the original photo. After that, whether you scan with a flatbed or a digits camera, the photo is going to look the same no matter what because it has already been imprinted on the film by the film camera and its lens. The advantage of using a digital camera is that you can often get sharper scans than scanners that are under $1000.

[@AbdonPhirathon]

@@imrannuriSure, if you’re satisfied with the results is one thing, but there is way more detail in a Medium Format negative that a Full Frame camera simply cannot capture all of the details in the scan without scanning it multiple times. That’s what OP guy was alluding to, not whether you lose your depth of field.