I bought a skier copy box (v2) a while ago, but I did a little test to see the concentration of the light source or how diffused it is. I pulled the image around a bit here, but this was the result. I included the Lightroom panel so you can see how I pushed the image around - it’s a pretty extreme grade, but I do have a tendency to push my film images around as much as I can, and it’s good to know where the limits are / where the light source is acting as a problem. I was a bit disappointed because this seems to be very highly recommended. Although the plastic seems to do a good job at diffusing the light, I wish the light source wasn’t so concentrated.
I also notice on other peoples images who are using the skier, as well as on mine, there are these specs. I blew as much dust off of the plastic on the skier with a rocket blower, but it seems like these specs are a problem with the plastic quality itself.
Is anyone else having that spec issue with the skier copy box? can anyone else test their light source on it to see if it’s just my copy, or if this is a problem with the light source itself?
Nikon Z7 (ISO 64 + 1/160th) RAW Large → Nikon 55mm Micro f/3.5 (at f/8) → Skier Copy Box v2 → Lightroom
I also wanted to add here that, after doing a lot of scanning recently I’ve realized that this does have a bit of an impact on the final image. What I used to think was the lens flaring or vignetting heavily I’ve recently realized was actually this backlight not giving me even illumination. My negatives are much brighter around the edges than in the middle, and look very muddy or hazy.
I’ve reached our to Skier but I haven’t heard back from them.
So here’s what mine looks like. You have to adjust it pretty severely to actually see this but I don’t think it’s really a problem especially if you’re just scanning 35mm or 120.
I’m scanning 120 and I’m noticing a pretty common problem across a lot of my images of the vignetting around the edges. It’s mostly on the darker images in general, but I like to shoot scenes that are high contrast and I’d really need to rely on a system that doesn’t cause this issue. You can see on this slide for example that there’s hazing that’s very present especially in the darker areas.
Skier still hasn’t responded to my email as well. It’s quite a lot to pay for the copy box, and since the backlight is it’s main function, I would have expected it to have even illumination: I would say even illumination is pretty critical for scanning.
Woah yeah. Negative supply’s prices seem wild, haha. A panel with even lighting that’s 99 cri does seem like a great thing to get, but I may just try to buy some 99 cri leds and construct something myself. I’m just unsure of what plastic to get to use as a diffusion.
I think that you and I might be Googling the same things at the moment then. I’ve also been thinking of that but I think the diffusion screen is important as well. Let me know if you come up with anything and if Skier responds.
I’ve had a look through the little airflow holes on my Skier Copy Box II and it actually looks like the LEDs are evenly spread across the entire bottom of the box. I’m actually wondering if it’s more to do with the way the light from the side LEDs are being diffused. If only there was some way to open the box up to mess around with it.
I opened up my box and this is what it looks like inside. The LEDs look like they are uniformly arranged. One thing I did notice is that they don’t all seem to be mounted at the same angle. I’m wondering if this is by design or just quality issues.
I’m also wondering if putting some reflective material on the sides (like a mirror) will help with getting more light on the edges.
Hey, did you end up trying your mirror idea? I’m wondering if my vignetting was caused by my lens and not the actual panel. I was using the nikon 55mm micro 3.5 at f/8. I’ll try to test it soon again and get back. What lens are you using with it?
Also curious about this… there’s another thread where a couple of us are also using the Skier box and have been experiencing annoying vignetting like this. We’re also using adapter Micro-Nikkor lenses which could also be the issue (although in my case the vignetting changes between frames sometimes, so it’s probably not the lens).
I don’t know how the version 1 and 2 are but 3 is a disgrace in terms of uniformity. When working leica or medium one basically sits over 2 or LEDs and the fallof is terrible.
Also the dimming with the switch is ridicolous.
The strenght of the light is too strong for work and redundand as no short shutter times are requred. The holders also are not as clever as the they could be.
Was very dissapointed and I think it should not be on a recomendation list.
So I tried some mirror / reflective material on the sides and I didn’t see any change.
What I did find was that I got much better results from my scanning now that I have a black tube to prevent any additional stray light from getting in. I’ve scanned quite a few 6x9 frames now and they all look really good without that strange fall off on the edges. I’m happy with it now and will leave it until I can afford a Negative Supply light source.
Interesting. I think I will try this myself as well. Do you have a pic of your tube in action? Or perhaps can you show us a comparison between the scan without the tube and the same scan with?
