|
Wet Mounting Vs. Glass Carrier (FH-869G, FH-869GR) For Nikon Super CoolScan 8000/9000 This is a direct comparison between the Rotating Glass Carrier (FH-869GR, $329) and the Wet Mount Carrier ($650) for the Nikon Super CoolScan 8000/9000. Tests were preformed on a Nikon Super CoolScan 9000. I've also had the non-rotating glass carrier (FH-869G) which renders the same results as the rotating glass carrier (FH-869GR). I'll start by saying that wet mounting is for people that care about getting your scan as sharp as possible. If you are using Digital ICE (color film only) then sharpness is not you major concern and any old carrier will do for you. ICE slightly blurs the image leaving it with a lot less detail. It is for amateurs who don't want to, or can't do the work in Photoshop. If sharpness is important to you then read on and use the clone tool or history brush for dust and scratch removal. The RGC (Rotating Glass Carrier) is made by Nikon and is well constructed. The WMC (Wet Mount Carrier) is made by a third party by altering the standard Nikon made 120 carrier. It appears that they took a dremel and cut out the center, then siliconed in a piece of glass. I feel that it could be a lot better constructed for the money, and should not feel home-made, as it does. The RGC comes with, and must be used with masks that tell the scanner what format you are scanning. I liked the one for 6x6, it gave the image "dirty" edges. The non-rotating glass carrier comes with masks but can be used without them. The WMC comes with all the supplies you need. Kami fluid, a box of scanner cloths, and applicator bottle, 100 Mylar overlays that need to be cut in half, and a roll of tape. I've found no need for the tape. They say it's needed if your film is very curved. Scanning with the RGC is straight forward. You lay the film on the holder between two pieces of glass. The glass does not hold the film perfectly flat and allows air in between. I felt like I was constantly chasing dust. The results are sharper than the non-glass carriers, though not edge to edge. Scanning with the WMC is a bit more complicated, but after a few tries it becomes second nature. The WMC is a flat plane of glass. You add drops of Kami scanner fluid to the glass. You place your film on top of the fluid. Add more fluid to the top of the film and place a piece of Mylar over the film. There are usually bubbles trapped under the Mylar and film. They can usually be easily removed by using a scanner cloth to move them out from beneath the film and Mylar. I found that a soft rubber roller is a big help for the more stubborn bubbles. You can also easily slide the Mylar and film to straighten it out if necessary. The result is a perfectly flat piece of film. This allows an image to be in focus from edge to edge. The liquid refracts light differently than when it is absent making a more detailed, sharper image. I don't know the science behind this, but imagine looking in a fish tank with water. Then imagine the way it looks empty. It is a myth that wet mounting conceals dust. If anything it traps dust. The good news is that once you wet mount a relatively dust free negative it is air tight and no further dust can accumulate while you make adjustments. There is less dust with the WMC simply because you are sealing the film in Kami fluid. Also, there is no real clean-up. The Kami fluid evaporates within seconds of lifting the film from the carrier. When I first scanned with the RGC I thought that it could not get any sharper. After I scanned with the WMC I saw a dramatically sharper image. I feel that the WMC produces slightly hotter highlights in some cases, but that's a small price to pay for the difference in sharpness. The scan has absolute edge to edge sharpness and you can see a dramatic difference in detail. The end result is a film grain structure that is clearly more defined by wet mounting. If you are printing 8x10 or larger then I don't see that there is any acceptable way to scan other than the WMC. If you're not going to print 8x10 or larger then you don't really need to have the 8000/9000 scanner and a cheap flatbed with do. I feel that wet scanning is the only way to get the full potential out of the Nikon scanners. It should be $450 with supplies instead of $650, but unless you are going to build one yourself it's the only game in town. I think if you own a dremel and feel confident you might be able to build your own. If not then bite the bullet and buy the WMC. The following scan comparisons were made using the same negative and the exact same settings with Nikon Scan 4 at 4000dpi with both the RGC and the WMC. The only way to accurately demonstrate the difference is to show details from the image at 100% from both the RGC and the WMC side by side. At the top is the whole image from both carriers. At that size it is difficult to see the difference. I only provide it as reference to scale. The image was taken in Taiwan with a Hasselblad 503cw, 80mm and Ilford Delta 100. She is my fiancee's grandmother. Her name is Man-Mei. She is 105 years old.
Michael Dominic |
|