Friday, 19 October 2007

LED Macro Ring Light

A few weeks ago I put together a basic LED ring light to test whether such a device could be used for macro photography, and be powered by a single battery. The resulting LED array consisted of 10 LEDs (7 dim white, and 3 red (Maplin's fault)) with a single 180 Ohm resistor.

LED6

The resulting macros were not spectacular, with shutter speeds of 1/30s at ISO400, but it did prove that the concept was viable. So, armed with a new soldering iron and a supply of LEDs (6690 cd) and resistors from RS (68 Ohm) I set about seeing how many LEDs I could squeeze onto the ring; the magic number was 20. The circuit is relatively simple (10 parallel arrays of a series of 2 LEDs and a resistor), until you try to wire it up on tracked circuit board (involving a lot of breaking the tracks to avoid the inevitable short circuit.

LED1

The resulting light was much brighter than the original, which is unsurprising given the lights are 5 times brighter and there 3 times as many.

LED5

When the LEDs were aligned to point at a subject about 8 to 10cm in front of the lens, in a totally darkened room I managed a macro shot with a shutter speed of 1/100s at an ISO of 100 (albeit at a shallow depth of field of f/3).

LED7

So there we have it - a ring light which can easily evenly illuminate a macro subject, and unlike a flash can be left on while you set up. The set up still needs a few tweaks, and I need to work out the light temperature for white balance correction, but it is just about there. As a final touch I dismantled an old tripod and glued the mount to a PP3 battery holder (with build in switch). Combining this with a simple connector, both parts (light and battery) can be screwed on separately and then electrically connected which saves a tangle of wires.

LED8

All in all the mount was fairly cheap - of the parts I had to buy, the LEDs came in at £20 (including 5 spares), the resistors £1, the circuit board was an offcut from work, and the battery holder/connector about £4 - so roughly £25.

Thursday, 18 October 2007

Plustek Opticfilm 7200i

There were two reasons for buying a film scanner rather than a photo scanner: (i)I had a stack of negatives, but not many original photos, and (ii) after taking a film to be processed I saw that now that they are using digital scanners the aspect ratio of the photo is that of a digital camera (different to a 35mm film camera); so not all the negative is printed onto the photo (plus the colour correction was dire). After a lot of review reading I bought one of these from Amazon - the Plustek Opticfilm 7200i. Two things common to various reviews were that (i) it produced excellent results and (ii) the software is a bastard to set up. Since I'm running Vista, this did me some concern, as Vista struggles just running on its own platform.

So, a couple of days later it turned up, and I connected it up to the computer loaded all the software and then pressed the "quick scan" button, and it worked first time with no problems. The quick scan is a bit basic - it just about shows you what is on the negative, and not much more. Using the "Intelliscan" button I then scanned the negative to Silverfast (which according to every advert comes free with the scanner). The scan was actually very good, but unfortunately this is only a demo version - I scoured the boxes, instructions and CDs but could not find a code, and to buy the version I had looked like being £150 or so. Without the code the software is useless, and crashes a lot.

Undeterred I then updated the scanner driver to the latest version (as advised by an amazon review). Instantly everything stopped working. It took a lot of uninstalls and reboots before I got the original software back on. I wasn't prepared to pay for the full version of SilverFast, so read a few more reviews and came across Vuescan, which at $80 is a lot cheaper. I got the demo version first to see what the scan colour correction on both pristine and dirty negatives was like and it was pretty impressive. It doesn't correct major scratches, but neither did SilverFast (on the few occasions it didn't hang after a scan). The image below is from a very good quality negative, and is uncorrected from Vuescan's conversion (using the correct Agfa film setting). For both examples right click to view full picture.

Willen Lake - Benches

The next scan is from a 15 year old negative which had seen better days... (again uncorrected from Vuescan's effort, this time using a "generic" film)

Old House

So, in summary a great scanner at the price. But, if I had to start again (on either Vista or XP) I would install the driver disc (which also installs Presto! which I've not used at all, so may uninstall) and then test that the quick scan works ok.

I think the instructions say, plug in the USB lead, turn on, then install software (don't upgrade it unless you hit problems), reboot and it will then finish the install - after that put in a negative and test that the quickscan works. If it does, don't install the second disk (SilverFast); instead download the demo of Vuescan and play around with it - it will put "$" symbols over the picture, but for seeing how it works that doesn't cause any problems. If it works fine for you, get the full version (unlimited upgrades) - for £40 it is worth it.