What is "fluid mount"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter silenceseeker2003
  • Start date Start date
S

silenceseeker2003

I just encountered a spec sheet for a scanner with "fluid mount for wet
mount film scanning":

http://tinyurl.com/lu5x8

Apparently this is a selling point, but I have no idea what it is for,
nor what "wet mount film scanning" means.

Could someone please explain the above or point me to a place where I
can read an overview of this?

Thanks!
Sam
 
I just encountered a spec sheet for a scanner with "fluid mount for wet
mount film scanning":

http://tinyurl.com/lu5x8

Apparently this is a selling point, but I have no idea what it is for,
nor what "wet mount film scanning" means.

Could someone please explain the above or point me to a place where I
can read an overview of this?

Thanks!
Sam
Click to expand...

See Wet Mounting: Scroll down some.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/scanners/drum_scans.shtml

Read about Drum scanners.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scanner_(computing)
 
Carl, thank you so much for your quick reply. Just in case that web
site will go down some day, I am quoting:

"A wet mount consist of placing a mounting fluid between the film and
the drum (which is shaped like a cylinder made out of a highly
translucent plastic-like material), and between the film and a piece of
clear acetate that is placed over the film. The wet fluid forms a
wet-seal between the top and bottom surface of the film. Just looking
at this wet-seal over a light box, one can clearly see the improved
clarity of the film Vs. looking at film on a light-box without a wet
mount. In addition to removing scratches and dust, wet mounts also
blend film grain to make it unnoticeable"

And from Wikipedia:

"The image to be scanned is soaked in oil, then wrapped around the
drum; this process is known as wet mounting."

So, if I understand correctly, the fluid (oil) actually touches the
film when scanning - which brings the following questions:

1. Does the film need to be wiped/dried after such scanning?
2. Do I have to use new fluid for each scan?

And one last question: my understanding from the two URLs you provided
is that wet mounting is a characteristic of "drum scanners". The Epson
Perfection V750-M PRO however is described as a flatbed scanner. Do you
have an idea what this means regarding the nature of wet mounting in
this product?

Thanks again!
 
1. Does the film need to be wiped/dried after such scanning?
Click to expand...
In practice no, because the fluid is so volatile that once the actate cover
is removed it evaporates before you can wipe it off. It becomes
petrochemical fumes to be breathed. :-) Personally I wouldn't do this at
home.
2. Do I have to use new fluid for each scan?
Click to expand...
Because of (1.), yes.

The other reasons for wet mounting:

1. Imperfections in the film are filled-in
2. Maintains flatness with respect to the focal plane

The second is the reason fluid mounting is available even with some
professional flatbed scanners, i.e. Scitex EverSmart.
And one last question: my understanding from the two URLs you provided
is that wet mounting is a characteristic of "drum scanners". The Epson
Perfection V750-M PRO however is described as a flatbed scanner. Do you
have an idea what this means regarding the nature of wet mounting in
this product?
Click to expand...

I was surprised to hear that Epson offered this as an option in a consumer
scanner. Don't they realise there may be potential liabilities down the
road, i.e. fire, medical? This may be a reason Nikon hasn't come out with a
wet mount tray for their medium format scanners, although third party
vendors have.

Dane
 
So, if I understand correctly, the fluid (oil) actually touches the
film when scanning - which brings the following questions:

1. Does the film need to be wiped/dried after such scanning?
2. Do I have to use new fluid for each scan?
Click to expand...

The "oil" in question is not really oil in any common sense.
Kami, for example, is very volatile. It's basically lighter fluid.
(It's also very flammable and the fumes are probably evil
for your health.) In any case, once you're done scanning,
and after you remove the film from the platen, it evaporates
off your film in a couple of minutes. Because it's not water-
based, the emulsion doesn't soften.

The stuff isn't reusable. But you only need a few milliliters
of the stuff for a single film strip, if you're careful.

And one last question: my understanding from the two URLs you provided
is that wet mounting is a characteristic of "drum scanners". The Epson
Perfection V750-M PRO however is described as a flatbed scanner. Do you
have an idea what this means regarding the nature of wet mounting in
this product?
Click to expand...


Same general idea, you're just wet-mounting to a
flat surface instead of a clear cylinder.

The main idea behind wet mounting is that it keeps
your film perfectly flat. Presumably it also helps
minimize certain shallow scratches in the film.

It has its own problems, though. For example, you
have to make sure you don't get bubbles between
the film and the scanner platen.

Generally, wet-mounting also involves a clear
acetate sheet *over* the film as well. So the
overall "sandwich" consists of

1. Scanner drum or platen (bottom)
2. a layer of "oil"
3. film
4. another layer of "oil"
5. clear acetate or mylar sheet (top)

Fancy tape is used along the edges to hold
the whole thing together (and to keep the
fluid from evaporating during the scan.)

See aztek.com or prazio.com for wet-mounting
supplies.

rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Wow - I am learning so much just by encountering an intriguing product.
Thank you so much Dane & Rafe.

The information presented here (especially rafe's comment that "you
have to make sure you don't get bubbles between the film and the
scanner platen"), prompts another question:

Isn't all of this done automatically by some sort of a feeder? Or does
the scanner's operator has to actually build that "sandwich" manually.
If the latter, then this must be very time consuming - which is
impractical for high volume scanning.
 
Wow - I am learning so much just by encountering an intriguing product.
Thank you so much Dane & Rafe.

The information presented here (especially rafe's comment that "you
have to make sure you don't get bubbles between the film and the
scanner platen"), prompts another question:

Isn't all of this done automatically by some sort of a feeder? Or does
the scanner's operator has to actually build that "sandwich" manually.
If the latter, then this must be very time consuming - which is
impractical for high volume scanning.
Click to expand...


Drum scanners often had associated "mounting stations"
that assisted with getting the "sandwich" assembled and
applying a squeegee action to push out the bubbles.

It was never automated beyond that, as far as I know.

I think Epson's "support" for wet-mounting is simply an
attempt to woo a few people away from drum scanners.

That is to say, folks who own or use drum scanners
will often claim that wet-mounting is *essential* to film
scanning -- and would never consider using a scanner
that didn't support wet-mounting.

It is time-consuming, of course. But as with everything
else, with practice it gets easier. Or so I'm told.

It is certainly true that at very high resolutions, if you
want sharpness commensurate with that resolution,
film flatness is a really big deal.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
rafe said:
It is certainly true that at very high resolutions, if you
want sharpness commensurate with that resolution,
film flatness is a really big deal.
Click to expand...

Interesting that you say that since as a layman I purchased an EPSON
Perfection 3200 PHOTO several years ago in order to archive my family
35mm negatives (and have multiple copies as a byproduct), thinking that
this was the most cost effective deal ($300 vs. over $1,000 for a
dedicated film scanner back then).

I was disappointed however to realize that it left so much to be
desired - especially in regard to the negative flatness and its
distance from the scanner glass. Moreover, at that time the "digital
ICE" version of it was not in the market yet. As a result, some
negatives scanned with terrible focus.

So now, I am questioning whether that purchase was wise. After all,
such a scanning project should only be done once.
It is time-consuming, of course. But as with everything
else, with practice it gets easier. Or so I'm told.
Click to expand...

Then dedicated film scanners became more affordable and I was
considering the purchase of one, but after some inquiry I discovered
that they are actually slower than my EPSON 3200 flatbed? I was
surprised to see that with a 3X-4X investment I still cannot cut the
film handling time.

I am not a professional photographer, but quality is important to me
because I see no point in saving negatives from the natural process of
fading and discoloration by scanning them into much worse quality
digital version.

Can you comment on this? Do you have any tips regarding the above?

Thanks,
Sam
 
I am not a professional photographer, but quality is important to me
because I see no point in saving negatives from the natural process of
fading and discoloration by scanning them into much worse quality
digital version.
Click to expand...


There's no silver bullet. The good things in life take
time and effort. I think it's generally true that a dedicated
film scanner will do better than any of the Epson film/
flatbed scanners. But not necessarily any faster.
Maybe the new Epson V750 will change that, but
I'm just a bit skeptical. (It won't be faster, of that
I'm fairly sure.)

It's one of the reasons I don't shoot much 35mm film
any more. A good capture from a Canon 10D makes
as good a print as my best 35mm scans (even though it's
far fewer pixels) -- and it's a LOT less effort, all around.

I still shoot larger film formats (MF and LF) and put
up with the scanning hassles. Matter of fact, I just
shelled out for a glass film carrier for my five year old
Nikon film scanner. Every now and then there's that
film strip that just *wont* lie flat. Some of my old
BW 35mm films are like that.

Eventually (a couple more years?) digicams will get
to where they beat scanned MF film, and then it'll
be down to LF scanning only. The best of them
have already matched scanned 645 film. I just can't
see any real use for 35mm film any more.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
I was surprised to hear that Epson offered this as an option in a consumer
scanner. Don't they realise there may be potential liabilities down the
road, i.e. fire, medical?
Click to expand...

If you will notice the text on the Epson site mainly describes the tray.
From what I hear, Epson is not going to supply the fluid or other supplies
due to the liability issues.

Doug
 
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention something else. If you own a $300 Acme scanner
and think that your 35mm Christmas snapshots will pop out at you once you
switch to fluid mounting, you are going to be disappointed. Tape down the
edges if you want flatness, you'll save time and money. Even the staunchest
fluid mount advocates in the Nikon medium format SIG don't claim any
improvement for formats smaller than medium format. For medium format images
the reason for using fluid mounting on the Nikons has more to do with DOF
issues, Newton rings, and the design of Nikon's medium format mounts. The
examples I've seen show very slight differences.
 
- said:
If you will notice the text on the Epson site mainly describes the tray.
From what I hear, Epson is not going to supply the fluid or other supplies
due to the liability issues.

Doug
Click to expand...

And it wouldn't surprise me if the European version of the
V750-M doesn't get the wet mount carrier included. It may come
as an optional item though but it may as well not happen. That
makes the recommended 809 Euro versus the US 800 $ price with
the wet mount carrier included a true European rip-off again.
There's not one word about fluid mounting in a recent German
press release about the V750-M while the US Epson site page on
the V750-M is filled with it. Could be related to the
liability issues but Kami ( a German manufacturer) is selling
this fluid in Europe too so why can't Epson sell the carrier
itself, it doesn't include the fluid.

Ernst

--

--
Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
( unvollendet )
 
Back
Top