Peripherals forum

General discussion

Very Large Format Film Scanning

by RIckJohnson123 / March 14, 2013 6:35 AM PDT

Anyone have any suggestions on how to or what can scan rolls of Kodak Aerographic Double-X 2405 Film?

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Very Large Format Film Scanning
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Very Large Format Film Scanning
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Good question but since that was in variable sizes.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / March 14, 2013 6:51 AM PDT

It would not be possible to answer.

However as you know, folk have used many methods to scan it in pieces and stitch together the result. Example at link. covers in short form about removing the usual distortion issues.

Collapse -
Very Large Format Film Scanning
by RIckJohnson123 / March 14, 2013 7:07 AM PDT

Stitching would be impossible. This film is 8" wide and probably a 100 foot long. Thanks for the reply, but I am looking for something like the 35 mm roll feed scanners, but can capture and digitize an 8" minimum width roll of film.

Collapse -
Please share what you've found so far.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / March 14, 2013 10:42 AM PDT

I'm thinking stitching is going to be the answer. Look at Breeze systems where they gang up many cameras to get the big picture.

My bet is this is just this one film. It's not an unusual task and something that has been done before.

However I find some folk want a device/machine to do this. If so, how many suitcases of cash is there for this job?

Collapse -
Wrong Rabbit Trail
by RIckJohnson123 / March 15, 2013 12:27 AM PDT

That is obviously a nice system.

But, I think I am being misunderstood on my question. I don't need to take pictures. I have a roll of film approximately 8 inches wide x 100 foot long on a spool, it is exposed/developed Kodak Aerographic Double-X 2405 Film, images are already on there. I am looking for someone who might have an idea how/or what hardware we could use to scan it/digitize it.

Collapse -
All I can share
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / March 15, 2013 1:06 AM PDT
In reply to: Wrong Rabbit Trail

Is what I see used to solve such today. This sort of large format "scan" was done before and they used cameras and math to stitch it all back together.

It appears you want a machine that can scan 8 foot wide media. As it's not something made in production I know folk that can engineer and create such but you are out in the millions of dollars where the current solution is more down to Earth.

I'll subscribe to this discussion to see if you find any 8 foot wide scanners but as it stands your best bet is to spec out how many DPI you want then we can figure out how much area we can "scan" with a camera. Then we could make a rig with the cameras in the fixed positions over the 8 foot scan width then feed the roll so many feet at a time then correct aspect and stitch later.

Collapse -
I must be in the wrong forum
by RIckJohnson123 / March 15, 2013 2:08 AM PDT
In reply to: All I can share

As I stated numerous times above, "8 inches wide" not 8 foot wide. Since film was made this wide I would assume there would have been something to scan it at one time or the other, thus my quandary.

Collapse -
Sorry, I misread that!!!
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / March 15, 2013 2:24 AM PDT

Now that we are back in the regular world, this task could be completed in a day with a little jig.

Remember my background is in engineering which includes automatic test rigs. That is, we would not only create the circuits and code but make the jig to hold the things we would test. Along the way we did robotics and more. But I digress.

At 8 inches wide I would build a rig to advance the film over a scanner and take the needed 100 or so scans. It should only take a few hours to get the scans done per roll and given the story my bet is that we don't want to use any motors or robots as such works are usually one of a kind and need the personal attention.

Once the scans are complete then we can head to the computers to stitch and publish the work.

-> Maybe there is more to this story but at this point we are back to common off the shelf gear.

Collapse -
Re: assume
by Kees_B Forum moderator / March 15, 2013 2:26 AM PDT

When was this 8 inch (20 cm) film made? There must have been devices to duplicate a master to another film for distribution.

But that's not really the same as scanning it to a set of jpg's (1 for each frame, I assume) or a digital movie on DVD. So maybe such a device has never been made.
Then all can do: print each frame you want to a photo and scan that photo (but then there's the issue of negative and positive).


Popular Forums
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
Laptops 19,436 discussions
Security 30,426 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
Windows 10 360 discussions
Phones 15,802 discussions
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions


Having Wi-Fi troubles?

From the garage to the basement, we blanketed every square inch of the CNET Smart Home with fast, reliable Wi-Fi.