-
I've also been excluding as much light as possible, including room lighting, but equally problematic is the light box bouncing back from the phone front etc.
I'm convinced that background light can be reflected from the surface of the negative - especially from 'black' areas - possibly reducing the image contrast, and fooling the camera meter.
Keep in mind that my approach is very much a lash-up that owes more to wishful thinking than optical physics.
MrE-
Yeah, this is correct I as far as I'm aware
Negs have a shiny side and a less shiny side and the shiny side is the one that is the right way round, as seen from the macro lens.
You can apparently get slightly better results by shooting the other side (back side) and flipping it, or even better by blocking all extraneous light with a just the right length tube that goes from the lens to the neg, but... it's an extra step/more money spent in the process of sharing my photos with people on the internet, so I don't.
I reckon you are all cool enough to get the intent.
shinkuu_kiss
i "scan" the same way and just do what @sohi said, i think it's an advantage of using digital camera + macro lens that you can work with the negs like this
i also have to cover the rest of my light source to get decent results with my current setup, but it did't make a big difference with the camera/lens i was using previously so results may vary?
this neg was scanned badly to begin with but it's a lot better just after setting the black/white points