DIY Epson Flatbed Scanning Holder - Buh Bye Newton's Rings! - Large Format Friday

[@lupindeweir]

Wisdom is learning from somebody else's mistakes. Thank you!

[@IainHC1]

Ive doubted my scanners settings for a lonnnnnng time now!!...... This clear rule scan idea IS a game changer!!! Thank you for this Mat 🙂

[@howardsandler7175]

I do 4x5 on an Epson V750. I tape the negative emulsion side to the frosted side of a sheet of ANR glass, then suspend the glass, frosted side down over the scanner bed, propped up on felt standoffs at the optimal height. I like your technique because there wouldn't be the additional glass surfaces to keep dust free. One thing I may have missed in your video, but I think is important to mention is that you have to select "scan with film holder", not "scan with area guide" to get the higher resolution lens and higher optimal scan height on Epson V777-v850 scanners.

[@brineb58]

Raising the film definitely works!!! I do a lot of instant film and I use 3D printed holders that raise them from the glass and as you say, Buh-Bye Newton Rings!!!

[@MatMarrash]

The more niche I go with film photography, the closer I get to purchasing a 3D printer! Thanks Brian!

[@ericdomazlicky6413]

Thanks, I've been avoiding scanning my 8x10 negatives because of this. Looks like an easy work-around to the Newton Ring mess!

[@MatMarrash]

It's a very easy workaround, and I recommend checking out blogs linked (above in description) for the fine print.

[@JRileyStewart]

That's great you confirmed the utility of my method for checking the focal distance for the 8x10 flatbed lens on the V700. There are two lenses (one focusing on or just above the glass platen as you use for 8x10s and area guide) and the other focusing about 3-5 mm above the platen (for when 'holders' are used). I use solely the 'holder' mode when scanning so never checked my V700/800 in the area guide mode. Glad it worked for you!

[@philliproe204]

Thank you so so much! Now I really will start using my old Afga Ansco 8x10 camera again!

[@LilithAndTheMachine]

Going to have to try this! I've been driving myself crazy with Newton rings on Fuji HR-U x-ray film. Might do a smaller one for the Fuji instax wide while I'm at it. Lifesaver!

[@MatMarrash]

Oh my goodness yes, it seems like everything Fujifilm is riddled with Newton's Rings if it's on the scanner glass! Glad this could help and happy scanning. :)

[@ArthurFellig]

I've scanned a bunch of the HR-U with this method. It works great. No newton rings.

[@madscienti11]

I love HR-U and it's interesting that my experience is very different from yours-I've found that with either side down on the glass it's really newton ring free. My negatives tend to be very thick though. How do you develop yours? I'm using Rodinal at 1:100 in a rotary tank.

[@Francois_L_7933]

Instax definitely needs an air gap between the print and the glass. That's why I 3D printed a custom mask for the Instax Mini. And I'll definitely do one for the Instax Wide when I decide to use-up that pack that's been sitting on a shelf for way too long.

[@LilithAndTheMachine]

@@madscienti11 I develop 1:100 for 6 mins in rodinal. My negs I have had trouble with are a little on the thin side so that could be why. It is usually in the shadows so that would make sense.

[@EricsEdgeVideos]

Awesome solution to a long fought problem. Congrats.

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks Eric! Always trying to streamline the scanning workflow, and this is another step along that path. Now about re-scanning the entire backlog...

[@hootsmon13]

I bought the V850 for scanning my 5x7 and half plate negs, and I had the blight of newton rings. This looks like my potential saviour. Cheers Mat.👍

[@mikkokovasiipi]

Thanks for one good video again. I have one question tho, doesn’t the film bend in the middle closer to the glass making it out of focus? Or is the film just so thick that it keeps it’s shape?

[@RogerHyam]

I told you so 😅 - for film. I do my own silver gelatine glass plates and I used to put those on a Horne style mat but have started putting them straight on the scanner glass because the emulsion is so textured I don't seem to get Newton rings and I like to scan the edges of the plate. It's a bit naff, kind of like scanning the sprocket holes on 35mm. But film I scan taped to a frame cut from Ben's template.

[@gabrielsilvaz4199]

Hi 👋 I’m not sure if anybody has mentioned fluid mounting to you maybe it’s too much work but it will allow you to get a 100% perfectly flat surface scan. I noticed your negative have a ever so slight bow in it when you lay it down to scan. Your negatives are are big enough that you might not notice the sharpness difference from edge to center. I do like the ruler test. I will definitely use that method to find optimal sharpness height. I understand that some people won’t want to fluid mount every single negative they scan. Maybe I am a little crazy but I fluid mound every single scan. All you need is a 8 x 10 clean piece of glass. It doesn’t need to be special anti-newton glass. It just has to be a clean glass. With some narrow enough shims underneath it in the corners for your optimal height, so none of the image gets clipped off. Using a photographic clear, mylar sheet to sandwich the negative. This works great for 35 up to 4 x 5. For an 8 x 10 negative you will probably need to get a custom size piece of glass that will fit in the scanner giving you enough surface area between the edge of the sheet and the edge of the glass, so the mylar sucks everything tight together because the negative will be hanging upside down During the scanning process. This is very tedious work, and I can understand why some people would not want to do this for every single negative. It is the next level closest to a drum scan, which is very expensive. Sorry for the long winded comment. If this interests you, maybe you should try it at least once to see if you like it.

[@robinsievers2756]

Forbidden Wisdom. Thank you for your sacrifice Mat so that we all can scan our sheet film free of newton rings for $20 and some arts and crafts time, you crawled so we could fly

[@jonjanson8021]

Get a piece of A4 non reflective picture frame glass. Tape the neg along the edges to the dull non reflective side of the picture frame glass. Keep the neg perfectly flat on the glass when applying the tape. Cheap non reflective picture frame glass works just as well as expensive anti newton ring glass. Place the glass and neg on scanner, neg facing down, shiny side of the glass facing up.. Use 1mm 2mm 3mm spacers under each corner of the glass to get the right scanning height for your machine. I use model makers plastic card that comes in various thicknesses. These can be glued to the glass once you've found the correct height for your machine. Result. Perfectly flat neg, sharp scan and no newton rings. You can use fluid mount instead of tape for a perfectly flat negative. I just don't like putting messy fluid mount on my precious negs. If you use transparent tape you can also scan the film borders.

[@richardstollar4291]

I made a similar 3mm thick holder for 4x5 - works a charm - I added some masking tape to make a 'nest' for the film so it doesn't move around and is nicely lined up. Must make one for 8x10 though ;) Do you get any softness in the center where the film sags a bit? Happy re-scanning of all your 8x10 sheets, Mat.

[@anthonycollingridge970]

Hi Matt great video as always. Just about to invest in an Epson scanner for colour neg scanning, so this topic has popped up just at the right time for me. Thanks.

[@MatMarrash]

As much as it's given me grief, I still swear by my V700. If shopping used scanners, be sure the seller locks the scanning head otherwise it will not arrive in good shape!

[@jamieyoung9268]

Hi Matt I've been doing this for about 20 years for weird formats, as well as 8x10. I use a thin steel plate with a cutout for the negative, with just a little bit of overlap on the edges. The steel is around 18-20 gauge. The great thing about steel is that it's very rigid.You can tape the edges and keep tension on the neg. I made one specifically for my 70mm roundshot panoramic negs. The steel is low profile as well.

[@MatMarrash]

Got any of those spare steel holders lying around? ;) Thanks for you comment Jamie and let me know if you ever want to do a feature on panoramic large format!

[@jamieyoung9268]

@@MatMarrash If you want to do a cirkut shoot /feature sometime, I'd be game.

[@MatMarrash]

@@jamieyoung9268 I would LOVE to! Let's keep the conversation going and figure out the logistics on this. You have no idea how excited I am! 🤩

[@jestintzi]

I made one of these to scan 4x5 on my V600 (which only scans up to 120). Takes 2 scans but super easy to merge them in post.

[@MatMarrash]

Glad to hear this is working on V600's as well, thanks John!

[@andydreadsbmx]

I actually created something similar for 4x5 on a V600 that would allow it to be scanned in 2 parts but easily stitched because thats all I had. I now have a V850 and only shoot 4x5 so I have the holders that come with it but this is a good method and of course shout out to Ben Horne 🙂

[@MatMarrash]

Ben is one of the best out there! :)

[@dylangergutierrez]

Incredible your film, even thinner base, can support itself without touching in the middle at this size. I often have even 120 film with a bit of a droop in the middle with a holder. But if it works it works!

[@MatMarrash]

I'd recommend taping the film for optimal flatness, but for quicker scans "floating" the film worked just great!

[@Austinite333]

Your timing is impeccable as I have been considering options scanning for 8x10 on my V700. Question is the film sitting on top of your negative guide and if so are you experiencing any center sagging with the film on top? Thanks much.

[@MatMarrash]

This was a simple demo and I recommend reading through Ben's blog. Taping is recommended for optimal sharpness!

[@Austinite333]

@@MatMarrash Actually after my original comment I figured it out and 45 minutes later I traced out on an inexpensive, thin flexible plastic cutting board the shape of the original area guide outer dimensions. Then using a negative marked out the center cut just a bit smaller than the negative itself. Using several scraps of blue painters to secure the negative I found the center did not sag and stayed above the scanner glass. A test scan looked pretty damn good. No official height testing was done but I can raise the height if deemed necessary. Thanks again.

[@rmcinaz]

Great video. I've seen other people also have this jig fabricated at a metal shop out of aluminum. Lasts forever. I have a question on your gloves... what brand and where do you get them? Thanks, Mat.

[@MatMarrash]

I'm strongly considering an aluminum one for my upcoming scanning projects! Also thanks for the question on gloves, I'm often using biodegradable ones from Kroger, but I believe these ones are the same make: amzn.to/3pLFhWR

[@theanaloguemortgagebroker]

Hey Matt, thanks for the vid. I cut one for myself and it works a treat!

[@SidneyPratt]

Thanks. I have a water frame which works well almost like a drum scanner but and of course there is a but extremely time consuming.

[@ariaan_]

Great video, Mat! But did you get Newton rings with the emulsion side down on the glass? I didn't know that could happen, have to check my own scans now. Also, wouldn't it be better to tape the edges of the sheet to the holder to keep it from sagging? Great tip about the transparent ruler, I have to try that, I don't think my scans are as sharp as they could be. Enjoy your Friday! :-)

[@MatMarrash]

That's the craziest part, on a lot of color and select B&W films, they will get Newton's Rings when scanned either way. Fujifilm Acros I've been to be the most prone to it, but not with this DIY raised holder.

[@EdwardMartinsPhotography]

The advantage I see to Ben Horne's choice of the plastic/rubber cat tray material is that the sticky cello tape I would use to flatten the film out on the holder would peel off easily and not take the paper surface of the foam core with it. Having said that, I am still searching for the cat tray, Target seems to be out of stock/doesn't carry them anymore. A 3D printed frame would really be the way to go, someone needs to make and sell them... 🙂

[@MatMarrash]

Someone definitely needs to start chugging out some premium printed frames!

[@michaelharmon721]

I have the 850 Epson and it has a plastic guide for large format film but I never used it. My 4x5 images are in the holder that came with the scanner so no problem with newton rings. However I will have to try this when I get back home to China. Maybe make a holder for the 4x5.

[@markfohl2167]

Hey Mat, I never had any problem with Newton rings. At least I never noticed any rings. For 120 and larger negs, including the Fuji Xray, I just lay the neg down on the scanner (850 I think) emulsion side down. I don't put any glass or anything on the negs, therefore, no pressure. I have to flip the image in PS, but that's OK. Btw, when are you going to show us your new Ghibellini? :) :) :)

[@jbfischer3697]

Have you tried taping the film sheet on one side of the holder and putting the scanner on it's side, thus removing any sag ? Don't have a scanner, so don't know if the scanner would still work in that position.

[@chilecayenne]

Hi Mat!! From what I understand, the Newton rings come when film touches the scanner glass (or any glass that is not non-newtonian). I had a few thoughts: 1. Maybe 3D Print your frame, would be much easier than all the cutting and you could more precisely get the thickness down to match any scanner. 2. You possibly could get 2x sheets of non-newtonian glass 8x10 sized and sandwich your negatives between them thus avoiding rings AND keeping everything flat? 3. Have you considered using a digital camera set up to "scan" your negatives? I'm about to start doing this myself, using my GFX100 as the scanning camera, guessing that it can generate digital scans at a very high fidelity. Anyway, another great show....thank you and glad you fixed your "ring" problem!! Looking forward to your next installment!! CC

[@gregfaris6959]

1) I agree - I have 3D printed frames for my Epson scanner, and I get razor-sharp edges and right out to the edge of the image. 2) Sadly, "anti-newton" glass is not really very effective at reducing newton's rings. Moreover, the thickness of the lower glass, in your suggestion, would place the film at the wrong height; too high to focus on the glass level, yet too low to focus at the film holder level. The scanner uses two lenses, set at different focus distances. 3) Using a digital camera to scan large negatives represents a considerable loss in quality. The actual optical definition of an 8 x 10 film is worth at least 1 Gpixel (probably 2), so scanning it even with a 50MP sensor means you have thrown away 95% of your image.

[@davidmerrill3429]

@@gregfaris6959 agree on the second point. Using a macro extension I can digitize 35mm at nearly 1:1 but fidelity is reduced on my 6x6 and 6x7 negatives unless I stitch them--to say nothing of an 8x10!

[@johngreenwood9361]

From my experience (4x5 at 1600 dpi) I could tell the difference in sharpness of scans even down to a fraction of a millimeter. Masking tape strips on the corners of the epson holders make for good shims that put the film about 0.1mm higher off the bed per layer. A little trial and error with tape layers and you can find a sweet spot. The clear ruler method is very clever to find the optimal height.

[@andyvan5692]

CONGRATULATIONS :-)))) good to get a nice diy solution, but also some people have used a 'wet_scan' method, a special glass holder which you apply solution to, and glue (temporarily) the neg to this holder, to press the negative truly flat, is this just for focusing the negative?, or for this newton ring issue.

[@steveh1273]

Did you have to pull the top tray/lid from the top of the scanner? It's white on the inside and black on the other and covers the glass on the top door. I don't know what it is for. Thanks!

[@martykimble9999]

The problem with elevating the larger negative above the glass is it utilizes the second lens capable of scanning larger sizes. It's optimal height is directly on the bed. I was able to purchase a sheet of optical, antinewtin glass. I placed a small bead of silicone around the bed's glass to prevent oil from dripping into the scanner. Using drum scanner oil I mounted my negative to the bed using non residue tape. If you scan without adhering the negative, as the scanner moves across the patten it actually lifts the film harming the sharpness. I sandwiched the negative with the anti- Newton glass. Another method can be utilized with drum scanner emulsion. Look up kits on Aztec scanning. I did lots of testing and got the best results with venue scan. Sharper and easier to use raw mode. Sharpening turned off

[@MrFlyby34]

Mhh no newton rings without a wet scan is ok but I am quite in doubt about the overall sharpness vs the film flatness.... imho it only works well if you mount film to AN glass and use a wet scan. For that reason I'm using for 4x5 the 'Better scan' option.......

[@thomaspopple2291]

I've used a similar setup for 4x5 but I tape the neg to the frame to keep it from sagging in the middle. Otherwise I would think that the sharpness would be different in the middle where it sags compared to the edges where it is on the frame.

[@EdwardMartinsPhotography]

I've been thinking of doing this for 4x5 as well. The Epson film carrier is really poor. How can they make a great scanner and make such lousy film holders? Has anyone at Epson tried to use the scanners before shipping them out? 😕

[@SilntObsvr]

Another way to get rid of Newton rings and maintain optimal focus: wet scanning. This isn't as cheap to start (around $200 for a holder, tool set, and liter of scanning fluid), but once you have the (adjustable) scanning height set on the holder, will produce 100% area scans at the best resolution your scanner optics and software can offer, with somewhat easier per-frame setup than this frame (no nit-picky positioning of the film). Newton rings are eliminated by the almost identical refractive index of the scanning fluid and glass, and the fluid dries from negatives in about a minute with no damage, and no need to wipe them down. The same scanning holder will also work for all formats, whether 8x10, 4x5 (multiple film sheets in a single setup), 120 (up to three strips at a time) or even 35 mm (four or five strips will fit on the wet scan holder, though it might be tricky to get them all aligned and scanned before the fluid starts to dry out). Bad news is, a little higher barrier to entry (but if you afforded a $1000+ scanner, another $200 to get the most out of it doesn't seem out of reach); good news is, you're much less likely to ruin the furniture or need stitches from a mishap setting up for wet scanning. Now, don't get me wrong -- I've got a wet scan holder (but not the rest of the setup), but I'd make one of these, too, because once made, a single scan with this frame is much quicker than getting all the bits and bobs for wet scanning together (if I'm scanning a whole vacation worth of negatives, on the other hand, wet scanning probably wins).

[@fortworthbret]

Good stuff Mat, for all but 8X10 I use a pice of anti-newton glass which has saved me well. The piece I have doesn't voter 8X10 though (also V700)

[@jacopotassinari]

great video, thanks for this great work Wouldn't you try on a added glass (thick as required) a wet scan?

[@Shanesshiit]

I like these kinds of videos that you do

[@BotchFrivarg]

With a slight alteration this might be also very useful for me. I shoot 4x5 and scan with the Epson V800, the included holder has 2 problems, the first is only 1 sheet can be scanned at the time (this is a minor issue though), the second issue is a lot bigger and that is that the framing is so tight I can't get the film base in the frame without also cropping some of the rest of the film. So making my own holder might not be a bad idea

[@champifyme]

I feel your pain :D I experienced quite the same feeling of time lost when realising I was scanning the wrong way (definition, newton ring....) One question though : you are just "throwing" the film on the support ? it is not parallel to the glass ? It works because the highest point and the lowest point are between accepted focus range of the scanner ?

[@JanneRanta]

If you raise the edges with the mask from the surface 2-3mm doesn't the center sag down to make contact still? If there is nothing holding the edges you would expect that to happen.

[@GreggObst]

That sure beats the 8x10 Negative Supply holder for $1479 at B&H.

[@MatMarrash]

I'm going to reserve my thoughts, but that much cheddar buys a LOT of film!

[@BobOgden1]

Wait, what? You just drape it in the frame? What is stopping it from sagging? I would expect focus to be all over

[@MatMarrash]

Focus hasn't shifted AND there's enough of a gap to prevent heating and curling. Ben Horne recommends taping to the holder for more precision.

[@c.augustin]

Not in, but *on* the frame. It does sag a bit (can be clearly seen in one instance), but it looks as if not far enough to touch the glass. While sharp (the depth of field for these scanners is quite large, several millimeters as it seems), this would lead to small distortions, that might be visible when doing architectural photography (or have straight objects near the edges); this is not theory, but I actually do experience it with Rollei Infrared 400 S 4x5 sheets, because they do have a tendency to slightly curl, and it can become visible. This method might actually work with the usual (stiff) 4x5 stuff, but I would not use it for 8x10. Both Mat and Ben are mostly into nature and landscape (and portrait in case of Mat), so it won't affect them. I myself would rather go with wet-mount, but this is not only a messy process, materials are also hard to get (and expensive). Luckily I don't have problems with Newton Rings (so far).

[@BobOgden1]

@@MatMarrash ah, I wondered about that. I think I will go with tape to be sure Excellent tutorial. Thanks Mat

[@BobOgden1]

@@c.augustin hadn't thought that scanners had a significant dof. That'll fix it. I think Mat's mention of tape would resolve further issues

[@c.augustin]

@@BobOgden1 I like to have the whole format (including all borders) in my scan, but for those that don't mind the border, the method shown should be really helpful. I'm using a m43 camera with a macro lens, and there the DOF seems to be worse - or maybe not. I should do some tests (could be a method to get rid of the glass and the dust it attracts ;-)).

[@SD_Alias]

Interesting. But is the film not out of focus if raised above its normal position? ANd is a 8x10 not hanging down in the middle? I have no Epson but a Linoscan 1450

[@dongxu2059]

Cool episode ! The OEM option from Epson is just not enough. Thanks!

[@dongxu2059]

I guess I am going to calibrate the height of my scanner next weekend :)

[@MatMarrash]

The worst part is that the solution is so inexpensive, it could have cost Epson a few extra dollars per scanner. Meanwhile the lacking features of their scanners have created entirely new markets for innovative products.

[@melaninxhalide1165]

Get a sheet of ANR glass from Negative Supply and tape your film to the glass BEFORE placing on the frame so that your neg is completely flat and doesn’t sag in the middle thus affecting the overall sharpness. Getting your negs off of the glass certainly helps get rid of the rings, but your scans here looked a little soft on the edges with regards to sharpness. Also, Vuescan is great for multiple pass scanning when wanting to make an Archival scan of your film, but for scans for social media Epson Scan 2 (for Mac) is all you really need. I find having a GUI is much more useful compared to the clunkiness of Vuescan which doesn’t have a GUI….

[@yohanwellham4982]

All of my computers got the softwares here. I first install them on virtual environnt to make sure they're not malware. So I can assure

[@alanhuntley55]

For 20 years I've wet mounted my 8x10 film directly to the glass bed and never had any Newton's Rings. I've thought about the DIY frame idea before but couldn't figure out a way to keep the film from sagging. I guess the height tolerance within the scanner could mitigate some loss of sharpness there.

[@gregfaris6959]

You are right to be concerned about sagging with larger films. There is no "height tolerance" within the scanner - It uses two separate lenses, one focused on the glass level, the other focused at film holder level. By wet mounting to the scanner bed you are very close to the best result you can get from these scanners. The only thing better is wet mounting on the wet-mounting accessory provided, which also places your film at the correct height to be scanned by the higher-resolution lens.

[@alanhuntley55]

@@gregfaris6959 I'm using an old Epson Expression 1680 to scan my LF film. There is no wet mount accessory; I would need to custom build something to allow that.

[@KrystianFirla]

I'v been using Tetenal AntyNeton Spray on scanner glass (and on pice of glasss to press negative down) and it works great eaven on 6400dpi, Unfortunatly on my EP 750 and 850 sharpest height is not on glass :(

[@MatMarrash]

Over on J. Riley Stewart's blog (linked in description), he details a more advanced scanning setup that uses a floating piece of glass well above standard scanning glass. He shows test results when using the new glass and even after removing the original scanning glass.

[@carpediem673]

I'm confused--I thought the idea of the holder was to keep the film from coming into direct contact with the glass. What am I missing?

[@jimpurcell]

Thanks!! Very helpful!

[@gregfaris6959]

Now wait just a minute here! You appear to be missing the most obvious (and well-known) fact about these scanners. You could have saved yourself those twelve years if you had read the instruction book that comes with your scanner! These EPSON scanners have TWO lenses, set at different focus distances. One lens is focused directly on the surface of the scanning glass, and the other is focused a few mm above it. I don't know how you could not know this, because you have to TELL the scanner which one you are using before you start scanning. The lens focused on the glass is slightly lower resolution, and is usually used with reflective materials (opaque paper), while the one above the glass is higher resolution and is usually recommended for transmission scanning (film). It is not a question of "tolerance" or different scanners being sharp at different distances - Each scanner of this type has TWO DISTINCT focus distances, based on which lens you use. If you use the Area Guide, it ony generally depicts the placement of the material on the bed, and the scanner will focus at the glass level. If you use a film holder, the material is held at a level above the glass, and you are using the lens adjusted at that level. Moreover, these guides all have adjustable feet on them to fine-tune your focus. One disadvantage of using the high-res off-the-glass lens is that larger formats will sag. Even if you have a holder that clips the film firmly by the edges, this will not prevent 8 x 10" film from sagging in the middle, and becoming unsharp. The option Epson proposes to solve ALL these issues (as well as Newton's rings) is the wet-scan tray. This will hold your film at the correct level for the upper (higher-res) lens, and also keep it perfectly flat - much like a drum scanner, thus avoiding sagging and Newton's Rings. It's more work though, and a lot messier.

[@The_IntrepidExplorer]

So the film sits on the edge of the new frame a couple mm off the bed. With such a large film how does it not sag in the middle and touch the bed? Or does that not matter

[@MatMarrash]

There is some sag, but none so great that it has dramatically altered the scan. Still far, far sharper than letting it sit bare on the glass.

[@The_IntrepidExplorer]

@@MatMarrash within the DoF I guess. 👍

[@CH_B_R_H_KA]

use magnetic vinyl of different thicknesses

[@MatMarrash]

Ooo, I still have some of that from working in alt process! But would the magnets interfere with the scanning head?

[@sheldonspock5566]

Not to be that person, but I really don't get it... how can this work? The film just laying there over the makeshift frame clearly bends... it doesn't stay flat. Obviously. So what's the catch here?

[@richardstollar4291]

FYI - Ben's template isn't the best and can be adjusted. Preview-scan only the template and you will see that some of the template appears in the scanned image - that part of the template can be trimmed away. Once it's been trimmed so you can't see the template, a sheet of 8x10 will sit cleanly on the scan glass and you can get ALL the image, including the border. Another template method - kzbin.info/www/bejne/m5nKYmqlpZiEl7s

[@TheMeccio]

Can it be used on 35mm?

[@MatMarrash]

Unless buying used, Epson scanners will come with tray-style holders for 35mm film. But if you want to scan strips with full sprocket borders, you could DIY a holder and tape them to suspend them fully above the glass.

[@kirkleadbetter1093]

Who else said, "eeeeeeeee-6" just after Matt said e-6?

[@blazerbarrel2]

Corn starch , just a pinch .

[@michaelsingJiuJitsu]

I almost had a siezure at 4:51

[@SecondSchool]

tNice tutorials video was dog sNice tutorialt