The back story

On your search for the best scan quality you will run across Doug Fisher over at Better Scanning. He makes a variable height mounting system that addresses focus plane issues found in flatbed scanners. While you visit his site encouraging yourself to buy his product you will also find his DIY wet mounting on the cheap page, where apparently for $60 you can be up and running.

Along the way it is impossible to overlook Julio Fernandez at ScanScience. At the core of his product line is Lumina scanning fluid, around which various kits are assembled to help get the best from your scanner. He sells a variety of other cleaners and equipment to deliver a one stop shop experience. You quickly find that $60 is not what you are spending. Nothing Julio is selling inhibits also buying Doug Fisher’s variable mounting system, likely the ultimate setup for flatbeds.

My primary scanner for medium-format and smaller is the Nikon Coolscan 9000. It is a fantastic machine offering among other things, a variable focus lens which means even if there was such a thing as Doug Fisher’s variable height mounting system, it would be a waste on a Nikon Coolscan 9000. As part of your scan, the Nikon Coolscan 9000 will either auto-focus or allow you to select the focus point. This is the scanner I was using almost exclusively at the end of 2009 and my wet scanning adventure led me to try ScanScience.

Earlier in the year I picked up an Epson Perfection V750-M Pro to scan my large format photography. This is where I would be excited to try the Better Scanning system. As you will see, it is clearly superior to the variable focus solution from ScanScience.

Opening the box

I live in Brooklyn, New York USA. ScanScience ships from Orangeville, Ontario Canada. Having purchased twice I know for certain it takes longer than all the estimates suggest. Likely the shipment sits in customs and with all the heightened security gets delayed on its ground journey. So, by the time you get your ScanScience kit you are delighted because you forgot when it was supposed to arrive.

Opening the box the first time informs you of three key things.

• First, all the items scream exactness. The thin scientific glass, precut overlays and the careful packaging all speak to the time dedicated to sourcing and assembling the kit.
• Second, some of the products you purchased you could have found elsewhere, possibly for cheaper, for example, the lint-free gloves or the squeegee. For that matter, you could probably buy all of it if you knew what you were looking for.
• Third, the Lumina fluid is the star of the show – standing out as the one product you won’t buy somewhere else. Second place goes to the ultra-thin beveled-edge scientific glass.

Everything is perfectly assembled and while obviously hand crafted is appreciated and valued.

A ScanScience kit for 35mm and medium-format film. I ordered two bottles of Lumina and an extra glass plate for each format.

My second order to supply the Epson Perfection V750-M Pro was a similar experience. The biggest difference in the kit was the solution to the variable height mounting solution which is a set of “shims” to raise or lower the film plane. I actually own a micrometer so finding and assembling the various shims wouldn’t have been too challenging, but it would take time and that I have little of. What is more, I have trouble seeing a remarkable difference between many of the adjustments in height. I have used the default Epson dry adapter, Epson’s wet scanning tray and ScanScience shims and while I have settled on a height, it was a challenging activity worthy of its own post.

A ScanSCience kit for 4x5 large format with the optional film cleaner and power pump.

Thoughts

In practice it takes some time to get the proper technique in assembling clean and bubble free wet mounts. That said this is probably true for most setups.

While there is no obvious deception, initially you have the feeling like you overpaid for the “kit”. I mean the kit comes with Bounty sheets. It says so. So, what is the surprise when you get a wad of towel paper? Similarly, the microfiber cloth, what did you expect? At the end of the day, you are paying for shopping services, because while you could have purchased these things on your own, it takes time to conceive and assemble a kit. If you do not know what you are looking for, ScanScience delivers the single point of purchase experience. Technically anyone could source the components, but why? You pay with time or money, so get over the fact that you could have done it on your own and focus on the fact that you didn’t have to. More importantly, the items that matter are really of excellent quality – clearly demonstrating someone who knows more than you did their job.

I haven’t used other wet mounting fluids but Lumina seems to do the trick. If you buy into the safety claims, Lumina is a better substance to be working with. It goes on wet like an oil and stays with you throughout the scan. When you disassemble the mount it will evaporate. You film usually dries unaffected and while this could be true for the glass and overlays, I clean everything between mounts.

If you are using a Nikon Coolscan 9000 you will have to modify your film holder. ScanScience does not offer instructions on how to do it, so it is DIY activity. You can see how I did it in a previous post.

As you start working through your technique you will find that dust is everywhere. You need compressed air or an anti-static brush or both. I use the tried and true Staticmaster brush and Pec-Pad wipes.

You need a clean and flat work area. I use a quarter-inch glass plate, but look forward to using a nicer larger light box. Consider what you have as the distance between a perfect mount and your scanner is filled with dust.

ScanScience offers a solid service and high-quality products. The kits and digital manual get you up and running quickly. Julio is quick to offer help and support as you work through your purchasing decisions and mounting technique. Remarkable results are possible.

If you are the kind of person that happily assembles the DIY kit for projects then get only the items you don’t think you can easily source on your own. If you are happy to pay for this kind of service, know that you will. The resulting quality of my wet mount scans is worth every penny. I would definitely buy from ScanScience again.

If I missed something in this review or simply didn’t answer your burning question, ask! There was nothing worse than searching and not finding an answer. I’ll tell you what I know and share my experiences.

My initial test compares the results of a dry and wet scan of the same negative. The image was captured with a Mamiya 7ii, 80mm f4 outfit. It was an extended exposure, taken at dusk. The film is 120 Kodak TMAX 400 developed at LTI New York City. The scan was performed with the same settings – 4000dpi; scale 100%; 16bit; multi-sample 1x; CCD Scan Mode set to superfine; scan image enhancer on; custom focus, black and white points. This resulted in NEF (RAW) files on disk exceeding 550MB files. Slight differences in crop are responsible for the file difference.  The wet scan fluid is Scan Science’s Lumina – a full review to come!

To keep things as simple and neutral as possible the screen shots that follow are from Nikon Scan. No processing has been performed on either, what we see is what was captured and saved. Snagit was used to capture the screens and the only modification is cropping out the main user interface of Nikon Scan. To properly view this comparison you will need to see the large versions of the following images (~2MB PNGs) by clicking the smaller versions below.

The first image shows the dry scan (left) and the wet scan (right). Each is at 8% with the scan settings area of the image view displayed to show all things that could be recorded are equal. Notice the greater tonal depth on the wet scan specifically in the shadows. Notice the crisper detail in the bricks, especially around the chimney top.

The next image zooms into the chimney at 33.33%. The details apparent at 8% are now very clear. Notice the dust caught in the wet scan. I didn’t realize how much was there. Compressed air and lint-free tissues are now in hand for future scans. An anti-static brush is on my B&H wish list.

This following image is the same view zoomed to 100%. This shows without question, the wet scan on the right more detailed and has greater dynamic range.

The differences were so dramatic that I questioned if the focus points were the same. The default focus point is middle negative. The following image compares both at approximately middle image. At this 100% view the differences are subtle, but present. Again, notice the richer darks on the right and greater overall range. What is muddy gray on the left is a stronger gray tone on the right. The grain structure from the window (upper right) is simpler and smoother when comparing the two scans.

This final image is found on the left middle of the image and offers yet another point of comparison. It shows the bricks and window frame of an apartment. Again, notice the overall dynamic range, but more importantly, review the detail seen in the brick.

If you caught me a couple of weeks ago, I would have told you that wet scanning might be a gimmick. I wasn’t convinced from what I could find and while the 9000 ED is a great scanner it isn’t a drum scanner, so I didn’t presume the comparison in process was transferable. At the very least, it can be said, that for black and white negatives, wet scanning is a must. The quality is apparent with almost no detailed review. The effort added to the overall workflow is relatively small and the cost is nominal when compared to all the other things photo geeks spend money on.

Finally, this is the image after being imported into Adobe Photoshop Lightroom. I adjusted the crop slightly to align the horizon (noticeable at the top). Basic treatment includes conversion to grayscale, Recovery set to 12 and Clarity to 80. Tone curve is set to the Medium Contrast setting. No additional sharpening was applied. A slight vignette is added at an Amount of -15. I then edited a copy in Adobe Photoshop to review and remove a few dozen dust threads and two air bubbles at 100%. While I was there I removed the distracting light in the lower right. I am not sure I would say I am done, but my intent was to show a “clean” version of the image for review. The JPEG export was done at 100% quality, sRGB, 75ppi and 2000 pixels on its largest edge. The version below is a reduced size, remember to view the full sized version by clicking the image.

Courtyard at dusk, Park Slope, Brooklyn, New York