• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Skier Sunray Box III review

Skier Sunray Box III review

October 23, 2021 JimK 2 Comments

As you know if you’ve been following along in this blog, I’ve been working on ways to digitize film. I once has an Imacon Precision II scanner, but Hasselblad stopped supporting it. My thinking has been to use a GFX 100 or GFX 100S and Schneider and Rodenstock macro lenses. I’ve done some work the Fuji 120 mm f/4 GF macro, but it has field curvature, pincushion distortion, and isn’t sharp in the corners beyond 1:2.

I’ve been using this setup:

The LED panel is a Westcott unit. I put a piece of plastic over it, some Rosco diffusion gels over that, and couple of canning lids over that, and a negative carrier on top. Crude, but it works.

Here’s the Skier box:

Bamboo case, three-brightness LED panel inside., decent diffuser. They claim good color for a LED panel. They’re right:

 

It’s bright, to0. Not as bright as the Westcott panel, but plenty bright enough.

What’s not to love? The negative carriers.

Here’s the top side of the 35 mm one:

You can drop a mounted slide in if you want to scan one.

Here’s the bottom side:

You can loosen the screws and move the mask to scan panoramas. If you want to scan half frame negs, you’re out of luck.

The big problem is that if you want to scan unmounted film, you’re supposed to slide it in between the top and bottom pieces. I would never do that with a negative strip I cared about. I think it’s a great way to get scratches, especially if there is a lot of curl to the film.

Here’s the 120 film holder top side:

And the bottom side:

Same deal. Ugh.

Here’s the 4×5 holder, top side:

And here it is split into the two halves:

You drop the negative into the depression, put the cap on it, and scan. There’s a place for your finger when you want to get the negative out. That’s not bad.

I’m sticking with my Durst negative carriers, which work just fine on the Skier unit.

 

 

So for me it is basically an expensive light table.

How good is the evenness of that light table. Not bad:

4×5 Skier holder, f/22 with GFX 100 and 120/4 GF macro lens

If I really boost the contrast, you can see that there is falloff near the edges.

4×5 Skier holder, f/22 with GFX 100 and 120/4 GF macro lens, increased contrast

I like to have the light table the next size up from the neg I’m scanning. If I’m scanning a 4×5, I want at least a 5×7 light table. If I’m scanning an 8×10, I want at least a 11×14 light table. The Skier is not quite big enough, but I think it’ll be fine for all but scientific work.

The Last Word

← Illuminants for scanning Scanning black-and-white negatives with a GFX 100S →

Comments

  1. Zé De Boni says

    October 23, 2021 at 7:44 pm

    Two additional basic parameters to control in such setup:
    – Emulsion side up, facing the lens; flip sides in post
    – High precision plane parallelism; this can be achieved by using the two mirrors technique.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      October 23, 2021 at 8:18 pm

      Agree on emulsion side.

      Perfect parallelism not essential if you stack.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.