# digitizing old photos (prints)



## jmlachance (Nov 6, 2005)

I have an older Brother scanner but before I start on this project, has anyone found a scanner accessorie or method that makes this job easier and fasterÉ


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

Scanning is never easy or fast. 

Without posting pages on the subject, the single best piece of advice I can pass along to you at this point, is to simply start out with a decent scanner.

Developing your scanning techniques (i.e. learning the tricks that will enhance your output and save you time) can all fall out from there. 

You'll invest many hours in this, and just end up shooting yourself when you realize that for a few bucks in equipment, your results could have looked a whole lot better.

I've been there. I've rescanned. I've learned.


----------



## SoyMac (Apr 16, 2005)

Some tips I can give you:

1. Set your scan resolution to 400 dpi or better.
Start out with a high-resolution scan, and keep that original untouched. You can always play around with digital copies / duplicates of the original, if you want to crop or enhance the photo.

2. Use the "multi-crop" feature in your scanner software so you can scan several photos at the same time - save time!

3. I know some will disagree, but I love iPhoto for organising and editing my photos. I can label albums by date and family name, or whatever. I find iPhoto's editing tools to generally be more than adequate for cataloguing collections of old photos.

I just scanned a bunch of old photos from Mom's side of the family, and now I'm going to have my cousin over for a day-long scanning party, including lunch break and walk breaks, to scan hundreds of old photos from the other side of the family.

It's really amazing to see that these are not just family photos, but also invaluable historical documents about life in Canada.

Good luck with your scanning!


----------



## CanadaRAM (Jul 24, 2005)

A downside to batch scanning and dividing them later is that the scanner software's auto levels and auto colour correction feature would be forced to average the correction over all of the photos, which is seldom as accurate. 

Although you may want to turn the feature off if you are planning to do all correction manually, it's sometimes useful for scanning yellowed or faded photos. 

Also look into calibrating the scanner.
Scanner Calibration - Calibrate Your Scanner - How and Why to Calibrate Your Scanner and Other Peripherals


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

SoyMac said:


> Some tips I can give you:
> 
> 1. Set your scan resolution to 400 dpi or better.


Try WAY higher. More like 1200 minimum. And save in a lossless format like TIFF.

Yes, this produces large files, but at least you won't have to scan them over again when you realise you scanned them too low the first time.



> 2. Use the "multi-crop" feature in your scanner software so you can scan several photos at the same time - save time!


See CanadaRAM's post on this.



> 3. I know some will disagree, but I love iPhoto for organising and editing my photos. I can label albums by date and family name, or whatever. I find iPhoto's editing tools to generally be more than adequate for cataloguing collections of old photos.


Agreed.



> It's really amazing to see that these are not just family photos, but also invaluable historical documents about life in Canada.


What a great attitude. Absolutely spot on.


----------



## johnb1 (Aug 6, 2006)

*Quite True*

I agree with what all of you said-600 dpi would be fine, or better, and will take a time-lots of time. Over the summer I scanned in over 2000 25 mm slides on an OLD epson scanner with a TFU and it worked pretty well. Mind you, some of the slides were damaged, which I can't do anything about, some had hair on the negative, which would have meant taking the slide apart, and some were yellowed, which I could fix with a lot of tweaking. I used Prevue for the tweaking part (Graphic converter will work even better)-there's only so much you can do with a scanned in photo/slide, so do what you can. Oh, and make sure to to dust the slide/photo/negative well, and keep the scanner glass clean
Good luck-it's gonna take lots of time, but it'll be worth it

JOhn B


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Our family has been trying to divide this job between the three of us for years. I stumbled on this place not too long ago, haven't tried it yet but I think we will.

Photo Scanning - Make Your Old Photos Digital Files! | PhotoScanning.ca - Scan Photos In Toronto, Barrie, Orillia, Ontario Canada


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Also current scanners at affordable prices will do a very credible job on slides. You do not need a dedicated film scanner anymore.

Given the amount of time you are going to invest don't use and old or a cheapie scanner when a few hundred or less will give you archive level quality.












> A premium value for professional quality scans, the Epson Perfection 4490 Photo delivers extraordinary results with 4800 x 9600 dpi resolution and an impressive 3.4 Dmax. This full-featured performer makes it easy for anyone to quickly restore, repair and renew classic photos, film and transparencies for stunning color reprints and enlargements. Powerful Digital ICE technology offers built-in dust and scratch removal capabilities for film, while Epson Easy Photo Fix provides one-touch color restoration. Together, these two features bring new life to faded or damaged originals.
> 
> The Epson Perfection 4490 Photo offers fully automatic scanning for increased productivity, plus two advanced scanning modes for greater control. Convenient film holders accommodate multiple 35mm slides and negatives, plus medium format film. And, Hi-Speed USB 2.0 ensures fast data transfer. There's even a fully featured software package that *includes Adobe Photoshop Elements*, ABBYY FineReader Sprint and more.


Canon has some nice ones as well. Just a few years ago this level of scan was hardly available at any price - now the Epson is all of $319. and that includes the very useful Photoshop Elements. according to the link.

Even the low end Epson Photo is 4800x9600 at just over $100!!!

CDW Product Overview: Epson Perfection V200 Photo - flatbed scanner

Get ALL the resolution you can then adjust it down for the media you are scanning.
*Don't use an old scanner you have around.....it's just not worth it.*












> The Epson Perfection V200 Photo brilliantly scans photos, film and even 3D objects. With automatic scanning, 4800 dpi resolution and a convenient, high-rise lid, this versatile performer makes it easy to accomplish virtually any scanning project.
> 
> Scan images to e-mail, copy photos and documents for archiving purposes, scan film for frame-ready enlargements, or scan books and magazine layouts. You can even restore faded color photos and use them in your scrapbooking layouts. Or, use the Built-in Transparency Unit to conveniently scan slides and negatives. However you use this full-featured model, you're sure to get remarkable results.
> 
> With precision scanning technology, Advanced Digital Dust Correction, photo editing software and more, the V200 Photo has everything you need to achieve exceptional clarity and detail, whatever the project at hand.


 $104 

These are long term family history. Do them up and even put the raw scans on a DVD for posterity.
It IS a worthwhile family project but spend a bit to do it correctly.

What you see on the screen bears no relation to what a future print or output to HD will look like. Get that high DPi working - especially for slides and tuck them away raw.

THEN do your own alterations on a different set for shooting around on email or a web gallery. Keep those high resolutions safe.

Also DO tests in a few items before undertaking the major effort but highest rez scans gives you max information for the future.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Not to derail this thread, since I have loads of old photographs to scan as well, but what might be a good scanner for the scanning of old photographs AND slides in their mounts?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Either of the above.



> use the Built-in Transparency Unit to conveniently scan slides and negatives


----------



## Malco (Apr 18, 2003)

Excellent advice. I only have a few points to add.

Before you click scan, zoom in on the preview and colour correct it as much as you can. Use the eye droppers, sample a spot you know should be white and one for black. Photoshop etc can not correct everything. Garbage in, garbage out.

When it is time to reduce the file size do not throw away more than a third of the file size at a time. Reduce in steps. Apply a gentle sharpening after each reduction, I use an unsharp mask of 50% with a one pixel radius and threshold of zero. 

In Photoshop use the measure tool (ruler) to measure the edge of the photo that should be perpendicular and then do an arbitrary rotation. The measure tool supplies the correct angle to straighten a misscanned image.

You may not have Photoshop but the above tools may be available in other editors.

This site seems good from the small portion I have read.
I hope they don't disagree with me.
Scanning Basics 101 - All about digital images


----------



## MacMaster (Jan 22, 2006)

*Digitizing Old Photos (Prints)*

If you are going to scan your own photos, you will need a good scanner. The resolution of the scanner is not as critical as many people think - similar to high mega-pixel digital cameras. The resolution that you choose should based on your intended use.

Some scanners are rated by their optical resolution and some are rated by their interpolated resolution. There is a difference.

One of the most important features to look for is the D Range or Density Range of the scanner. This is what gives the scanner the ability to pick up details in the highlights and shadows. Check out this link: http://www.kcbx.net/~mhd/2photo/digital/range.htm

Generally higher priced scanners will provide greater optical resolution, a greater ability to pick up highlights and shadows ... and will be faster. This last feature may not seem important until you are scanning thousands of images.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

When you scan, do save them to an 'original scans' folder or something that is untouched - your raw files (not the format, the idea). Then duplicate that folder if you start to make corrections.

I have to respectfully disagree about the advice on scanning slides with a flatbed scanner. I have the epson v700 which is maybe 2 years old so a bit outdated, but it is absolutely terrible compared to a dedicated slide scanner. I bought the nikon LS-5000 and the difference is mindblowing. Mind you, the latter costs quite a bit more. There are plenty of these models available on Ebay which you can buy, scan your lot, the resell at a fairly high value. Or, you can find a service locally to take care of those for you.

the photoscanning.ca website, I would be very wary of them. Maybe send some samples if you try them. Why am I wary? Their pricing. I can't see how anyone can offer those low prices while outputting top quality. That, I'd have to see.

My advice: like the others said, buy a good scanner, scan at a high resolution, back your originals up, if you like music - play some while you scan and lastly, 
have fun.

One last piece of advice. I name my files alpha-numerically and then I keep a seperate pages document with any details such as dates and names. Iphoto is a great product, but I like to have another file format just in case that library gets messed up - same idea as saving the originals and then duplicating them - a raw backup if you will.

best of luck and have fun.

Cheers,
keebler


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Two years is a lifetime in scanners. No way I would ever recommend a dedicated slide scanner for non pro use.

Here are real people on the 4490 and a number with strong backgrounds.

Epson 4490 - is it any good? - Photo.net Digital Darkroom Forum


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I just wanted to repeat and emphasise MacDoc's EXCELLENT and often overlooked point -- *dump the raw scans to CD/DVD at the highest resolution possible.*

Future generations, future technology, and future historians will THANK YOU. Trust me on this.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

All this advice is great, I don't have anything to add on the hardware side. I'd like to emphasize, though, that hardware is only half of it. You also need a really good photo editing program. The full version of Photoshop isn't really overkill, not if you want the best results, but it may be beyond your financial means. Photoshop Elements is a good second-best alternative. The basic editing stuff in iPhoto and GraphicConverter is just that - basic. It isn't adequate for more than simple stuff - paddling at the shallow end. 

If you're buying a new scanner, you may find that a copy of Elements, or even full Photoshop, is included, especially with high-end units. Consider that as a big plus when choosing a scanner.


----------



## lakhanisky (Feb 15, 2008)

I dont know about shipping out my pics I wouldnt do it I would definatly wait in this situation cause of this : kodak s1220 I can asure you you will see these poping out in every camera store in the contry in the next year or so and wil charge about the same price as that online service maybe a bit more but not much or if so at larger resolution I'm telling this cause I was at PMA Canada and it was all the buzz for the store owners and I saw first hand the quality is impressive and I should know I've been working in the business for the past 10 years.


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

jmlachance said:


> I have an older Brother scanner but before I start on this project, has anyone found a scanner accessorie or method that makes this job easier and fasterÉ


I guess it will really depend a lot on what it is you need to scan and how much of it you have plus your ultimate goal in terms of end use. Eg website or prints. If you only need small sizes 4x5 up to 8x10 then sure todays crop of flatbed scanners will probably do the trick if you are scanning hard copy.

At work I use Epson 10000XL flatbed scanners which is way out of the price range of most folks but having that large area to work with and being able to gang up my scans will save a huge amount of time when I have to do a lot of photos in one shot. Also having the large bed allows us to scan full pages such as those in a photo album which may not fit a consumer 8x10 flatbed. Ok so I don't like stitching...

For film and slide scanning while flatbeds have come a long way (from when scans were pretty much crap) to today I would still go with a dedicated film scanner. If you have a lot of film or slides to scan Nikon makes bulk film and mounted slide attachments for their 2000 and 4000 scanners. 

At home I use Leafscan 35's and a Nikon Coolscan 8000 but then I scan for exhibition sized prints still I think if you are going to invest the amount of time required to scan a large batch of material you may just as well do it right the first time....

Kevin


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

MacDoc said:


> Two years is a lifetime in scanners. No way I would ever recommend a dedicated slide scanner for non pro use.
> 
> Here are real people on the 4490 and a number with strong backgrounds.
> 
> Epson 4490 - is it any good? - Photo.net Digital Darkroom Forum


MD, i think non-pro vs. pro work doesn't matter. what matters is whether or not the image is terrible or done right.

just an fyi that the 4490 is actually older than the V700


----------



## SoyMac (Apr 16, 2005)

Probably lots of great technical advice here, but something that I'm worried about is paralysing the OP with too much info and fear of failure.

I kept putting off scanning the old pics because I figured technology would improve, or I should research further the techniques to make sure I was scanning perfectly, and every day that passed without me digitising the photos was another day of possible damage to the photos through mold, water, fire, smoke, kids, dogs, or getting misplaced. 
We even had hundreds of photos from the turn of the century that were stored in a ... wait for it ....
plastic garbage bag!  
(Who here has not heard a story of someone's baby clothes, laundry, or prized possessions accidentally going to the curb on Garbage Day?)

My advice is to not wait too long trying to perfect your set up.
Example; I am scanning only black and white photos. Most of the info here about colour-correction or purchasing graphics software doesn't even apply to my situation (not sure about the OP's).

I think the most important thing is to start getting the job done.
Like keebler27 said, get a friend or Sweetie with you, play music, take breaks, and you'll be glad you preserved these memories and had fun doing it.


----------



## MacMaster (Jan 22, 2006)

lakhanisky said:


> kodak s1220[/URL] I can asure you you will see these poping out in every camera store in the contry in the next year or so ...


I've got one of these on order for both of my stores. If you don't want to commit to purchasing a good quality scanner or you just don't have the time to do it ... then your local camera shop will be a great option.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Slides and negatives I have always had professionally scanned, prints I scanned myself.

All...and I mean ALL scanned digital files need the tender love of Photoshop, Elements, Lightroom, GIMP or some other graphics/paint programme. Especially when restoration or reprints are the objective.

Vistek has the Epson V500 for $250 with a $50 mail-in rebate ($199 after rebate). I think I'll pick one up.


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

keebler27 said:


> the photoscanning.ca website, I would be very wary of them. Maybe send some samples if you try them. Why am I wary? Their pricing. I can't see how anyone can offer those low prices while outputting top quality. That, I'd have to see.


Hello everyone, 

I'm a long time ehmac lurker, and apple lover since my first ipod days! (2002, and the 7 since then + macbook pro). I'm also the owner of PhotoScanning.ca, mentioned previously in this thread. 

I'd like to let everyone know briefly about our service, basically we scan photos in bulk, and burn them to 2 identical DVDs for you. I'm not trying to sell here, but just address the user aboves concern. 

We are able to offer such low prices due to practically no overhead. Our business is mail-in/drop-off based, and no physical location exists. We pickup/drop off for free in downtown TO, along with offering meeting locations in the GTA. If you search their are many similar options in the States, following along this business plan

We scan files at 300dpi, in jpeg format. I'll be the first one to agree that our service may not be suitable for an art gallery, but I can assure you that for everyday use, we're among the best (and only fractions of the price).

As far as our expertise, I'm educated from Ryerson University in Graphic Communications Management (a premier program for the printing/graphic arts industry in Canada, as some of you may know).

I'd love to show everyone here that our company can live up to their expectations... and I'd like to offer a 5% discount to anyone who quotes "EhMac" while ordering before October 31st. Before you order, here is a blog written by one of our recent customers (Not an Artist: Pixels at Last)

Here is my opinion on this for the OP... If you have under 100 photos to be scanned, then by all means scan them yourself. Our scanners scan at high speeds, and therefore are very quick, but it is a daunting task to imagine scanning 1000's of photos on a flat bed $99 dollar scanner (especially if you value your time at over 5 cents per photo :lmao: )

By the way, another reason we're so cost-effective is as a marketing campaign in itself! Got you guys talking about it :clap: We'll be raising our prices to 10 cents near or after Christmas time.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

I usually scan at 600dpi, unless the picture is small, then I would go 1200dpi or 2400dpi.

Any good scanner should do the trick. I do not like the HP PhotoStupid garbage because it is always doing things to the files that are not "original". I prefer the Epsons run straight up.

Software depends - but I prefer to do any initial post-processing with Graphic Converter X because it is simple to use and doesn't wallop the system beyond belief.

Afterwards, I make downconverted versions of 300dpi for anything I am going to print, and 75dpi for anything I want for a screen display / presentation.

Saving the photos is another problem as there are many CD and DVD formats. I would highly recommend putting all of the "original" scans on high quality CD-R disks (not CD-RW), and get software that can burn a real, ISO-9660 disk, at the slowest speed possible. That way, the disk will be readable on the widest variety of machines and drives.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with going to say, DVD, but since their is no decent standard yet that is cross-platform, the original should be ISO-9660 CD. It is best to use DVD-R disks, so they play on the greatest variety of equipment, as the +R disks are not supported by the DVD Forum...


----------



## jmlachance (Nov 6, 2005)

Lots of great advice. Thanks all!


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

MacMaster said:


> I've got one of these on order for both of my stores. If you don't want to commit to purchasing a good quality scanner or you just don't have the time to do it ... then your local camera shop will be a great option.


This does look like a good product, we're using a similar model. As I said, we're not doing super-high resolution files, but scanning 300dpi prints quickly and affordable.
(edit - I think my first post was disapproved, if a mod wants to let me know what I should have changed please pm me)


----------



## Oakbridge (Mar 8, 2005)

I've just finished a couple of projects. One was for a family reunion, the other was for a buddy's 50th birthday party. I knew that I wanted to start scanning the thousands of slides that I have taken from 1976-1996 (when I got into video and then into digital). 

I purchased a Nikon Coolscan V ED. It does both slides and strips of negatives. I have been very very happy with the results and I didn't even get into the details of the software that came with it. I basically let it do it's thing because I knew that most of these slides were going to spend maybe 4-5 seconds on the screen that was going to be projected. 

However I do have some other work that I want to do with it. I did a lot of concert and sports photography and I want to go back over the work I did and start scanning it before I lose it. Kodachrome is fine but I'm starting to see some problems with some of the Ektachrome I used. 

I was fortunate that I have negatives for 98% of the stuff I shot that wasn't on slides. So the Nikon scanner will do the strips all at once, automatically advancing the strip to scan each frame. There are also add-ons that will allow you to do rolls and single frame negatives. 

For me, it wasn't a case of amateur vs. professional, or where I was going to use the scanned images. It was more important that I maintain the best quality of image as possible as there are plenty of shots that have sentimental value.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

*Scanner/Sofware*

With the last post in this thread nearly a year ago so in technological terms perhaps a life time ago. 

I am thinking of starting a project as a hobby. The hobby will be digitizing family photos, slides and family documents for future generations. I am trying to preserve and format photos and documents towards the future ie. DVD for today and then transition to the next big thing tomorrow.

Any suggestions of a Scanner (Hardware/Software combinations best solution) and Software to do a reasonable job for a family archive. 

I’m *not *looking for professional, museum or institutional archives quality.


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

BigDL said:


> With the last post in this thread nearly a year ago so in technological terms perhaps a life time ago.
> 
> I am thinking of starting a project as a hobby. The hobby will be digitizing family photos, slides and family documents for future generations. I am trying to preserve and format photos and documents towards the future ie. DVD for today and then transition to the next big thing tomorrow.
> 
> ...


BigDL,

Sounds like you're looking for a lot of work  Be ready to be the go to guy :lmao:

As far as the equipment that I would recommend if you are just getting in and want to keep your costs way down would be the Epson v500 - Epson V500 Perfection Photo Scanner Flatbed B11B189022 - Vistek Canada Product Detail

Going to run you about $300 bucks, and does a decent job for slides & photos. For documents you may need a larger bed (this is A4) but you may be able to stitch together depending on the number you have.

Good luck! As far as software, again it depends on your level & expenditure. If you're putting big bucks into buying specific units for different types of scanning (i.e. large format flatbed, dedicated slide scanner, etc) then you'll go with an advanced software like silverlight. If you're just starting out and looking to do the best job possible, stick with the basic software that comes with the scanner, and try to use something like PhotoShop elements to do editing (which comes with the scanner). I'd then use something like Picasa or iPhoto for organizing, tagging, exporting, etc. Then utilize online backup & sharing options to let your family enjoy your work too!

Good luck! 

Mat


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

The previous posts have covered the technology aspect of this endeavor... let me add one comment that may be of use. Apart from scanning at high resolution to preserve in better quality the images, the second benefit of high-resolution scans is the ability to view small photos at large sizes. This is particularly useful when reviewing photos with older members of your family whose eyesight may be deteriorating: essential if you need to identify faces, places, or objects. 

When you have your photos blown up to full screen / zoomed in, take some time to ignore the main subjects, and check out the background. You'll find lots of cool details: buildings that are no longer present; jewellery / art / other objects of value that have vanished over the years (careful - don't want to cause family strife among the descendants!); street signs & place names; license plate numbers; a wealth of unintentionally-captured information.

I've found my own family history project to be very rewarding (sumara.ca). And let me second a recommendation for using iPhoto for at least some of your work: I have created a few family history photo albums, which made excellent Christmas gifts. 

Oh, and yes, BACKUP!!! Keep digital copies (DVD / CD) and distribute them among family members. We are lost without our personal histories...


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> Not to derail this thread, since I have loads of old photographs to scan as well, but what might be a good scanner for the scanning of old photographs AND slides in their mounts?


My Epson Perfection 2450 is almost 7 years old. Handles neg strips, slides and individual negs up to 4x5 inches. Also does a great job with regular print. I would expect any midrange Epson would do the trick.

Also time spent in PhotoShop Elements will do wonders as far as cleaning up scratches and blemishes. There are some auto filters as well but often the good old clone tool can provide superior results and is well worth the additional time.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

BigDL said:


> Any suggestions of a Scanner (Hardware/Software combinations best solution) and Software to do a reasonable job for a family archive./QUOTE]
> 
> I've recommended the Epson V700 as a good all-purpose unit to others, with good feedback.
> 
> ...


----------



## boukman2 (Apr 6, 2009)

*dust removal*

i have a nikon V which i used to scan about 1500 slides a few years back. one thing no one has mentioned here is the dust removal feature. i think it is ice3? (been a while since i scanned). i have a feeling this is only available on a dedicated film scanner, although i could be wrong. it is an essential element if you are scanning negatives or slides. 
another thing to watch out for is the 'dmax' number. usually this number simply refers to the maximum theoretical density in relation to the number of bits the machine is scanning to. it is not a figure that someone has measured on the machine in question. i'm afraid you'll have to google the details. 'vuescan' is often reccomended on photography sites, although i didn't use it myself. 
if you are using a film scanner, learn to set the black and white points. this is the only way to get the maximum contrast. any other tweaking can be done in post. 
it is also very good to have two computers. one to scan and the other to do whatever else you want without interfering in the scanning machine. perhaps this is less important with multiple core machines...


----------



## lakhanisky (Feb 15, 2008)

Hi Yes alot has changed.... personaly I wouldnt scan pictures at home since I have posted on this thread last year. I've been receiving loads of emails from scancafé wich has a great service for scanning wich I've used in the past, and they always have these insane promotion like till tommorow they will scan at 1200dpi on a nikon top of the line negatif scanner with ice roc manual adjustment etc for 27 cents so if you if your gonna buy a 350$ scanner be sure to have more then 1500 scan and alot of time for it to be worth it... If you want to get emails for their promotions register on their website and the will send you one every two weeks or so and wait for the 50% rebate code.... there is one valide now wich is "julyheat" but heres the kicker you get 20% off the base service and 50% of the pro option proresolution it's all a bit complicated pricing scheme but worth it.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

lakhanisky said:


> I've been receiving loads of emails from scancafé wich has a great service for scanning wich I've used in the past,


They ship your images to Bangalore, India. Be sure to work the risk factor into your cost.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

ScanMan said:


> They ship your images to Bangalore, India. Be sure to work the risk factor into your cost.


Oh, and don't be surprised if your better images are used for overseas advertising without your permission. And I hope you don't send them any nudes -- I'll give you one guess what happens to those pics ...


----------



## lakhanisky (Feb 15, 2008)

Nice point but if you read their terms and conditions and their privacy policy they are verry strict on that point... there is always a risk involved even having pictures on your computer at home involves some degree of risk.... Terms and Conditions - ScanCafe Privacy - ScanCafe oh and security is verry high Safety - Quality Scanning - ScanCafe


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

ScanMan said:


> They ship your images to Bangalore, India. Be sure to work the risk factor into your cost.


Wow - they do that? It makes sense given the time it tales to scan and what they can pay someone over there. 

I have the v750 which is similar to the 700 

Solid scanner with amazing quality

the one thing to bear in mind is that these are your memories so don't skimp on quality. A good quality scan will last for years and you won't want to rescan them

plus you can always resell it


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

I wouldn't use a "service" - you will end up with some oddball, unsupported format of the lowest quality imaginable.

A scanner is pretty much a requirement for computers these days, so it is not just the cost of a scanner compared to an amount of photos, since there are tons of other tasks it can be pressed into, such as scanning a document for FAXing, or doing graphics, importing artwork, OCR, scanning in magazine articles for filing away, etc.

Scanners are inexpensive. One does not need the latest and greatest, or crazy features. I do not like feeders, they are all pro at shredding and destroying media. One can make up some acrylic or lexan holders that can entirely do the job, though a stabilized light source is a good thing if you are doing tons of negatives and slides.

I wouldn't want to ship any valuable photos anywhere, especially ones of historic value. The cost of a scanner is negligible. Really, people waste more money on garbage for their computers, while a good quality scanner will give you years of reliable service and usefulness. One can always look at an older scanner if price is a problem. Old AgfaScan scanners are excellent units, though limited to 300 dpi use, and can be had for under $30. Even a high quality scanner will only be in the $100 range - especially if you eschew all of the fancy features like film loaders that you will not really need, or want to even use on valuable films that you can't afford to have destroyed.

When it comes to scanners, a "TWAIN" compliant scanner will give you the best cross-OS, cross-OS version, and cross-platform support, and will work with the built in Image Capture utility OSX has. Skip such frills like "PhotoSmart" - you are much better off using third party applications for any resizing or corrections, if needed. I would recommend Graphic Converter X as your first software tool - it does lots of useful things without being costly or complex. You can do all of your basic cropping, adjusting, scaling, and changing of the dpi you will need. If you do want something for more advanced work, then GIMP or PhotoShop will handle that, but the first step should be the simplest and quickest.

Scanners have not changed much in the past few years, though some scanners do have higher DPI settings that may be advantageous. If you are mostly scanning in photos and not planning on blowing them up to large sizes, then you will probably never go above 600dpi. If you are into negatives and slides, you will want to handle 2400 dpi, and maybe even 4800dpi.

Out of all the scanners, I think that Epson has the best units that are commonly available, and have the best support when it comes to various platforms, because even with the worst case scenario, they are generally TWAIN complaint and will run, at least in basic modes, on pretty much any OS. Canon makes a decent scanner, but past experience with CanoScanners really left a bad taste in my mouth. HP is pretty much the garbage of the industry, mostly because of their terrible OS support, added frills that keep one from doing real scanning, poor colour quality, cheaply made feeders and cheap quality platics that will break in a week or two, and an over reliance on their terrible software and that PhotoSmart garbage.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

EvanPitts said:


> * I wouldn't want to ship any valuable photos anywhere, especially ones of historic value. *


I would also worry about some large operation using automated equipment. As EP said at times those auto feeds can double as a shredder.

At one point in my life I made a very good living copying old photos. My customers were willing to pay a premium as they knew the originals would never leave my control. I have heard way too many horror stories of originals being lost, damaged or misplaced; to entrust valued and irreplaceable items to an unknown company, the postal service, UPS or any other shipping company.


----------



## Smoothfonzo (May 17, 2007)

If you have old slides, but no slide scanner, try this. It's a method my Dad and I developed, and we were very impressed with the results.

Use your slide projector and project onto a white area, perhaps white cardboard on a door or wall. Next, take a picture of a slide with your digital camera. You'll want to fill your camera's field of view. Now, do this for every slide you want digitized.

Next, download your pictures and import them into photoshop or any other photo editing program, and do some colour correction. Auto-correction worked very well for me, but mileage may vary. Now you're free to crop and resize as necessary. I think you'll find you get very good results this way. When my Dad and I did it, we just did it as an experiment, but it turned out better than we both thought it would, and we now swear by it. The yellowed aging is gone and the pictures are actually sharper than the actual image from the slide. These were slides from the 80's, but with them fixed up, they looked just as if it were yesterday.


----------



## iheartmac (Jan 5, 2006)

My girlfriend just sent about 1500 old family negs to ScanCafe and they did an awesome job. It would have taken us more time than we have and they send numerous emails with status updates. It was 300-400 bux and you can also view all scans online and nix bad photos. There is a risk but the quality was awesome. I can't say enough good things about it.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
I wouldn't send anything to Bangalore - let alone anything of value.

Scanners are inexpensive. Once someone gets accustomed to proper settings, scanning is easy, and one can actually go through hundreds of pictures in a very short time, especially with appropriate frames which locate each picture in the same place. Plus one has the ultimate quality control, especially with older photos that had arbitrary sizes.

I would never use an automatic feeder with anything that I valued, there is too much risk.

I would never have an external company subject any of my materials to the predations of inferior operating systems like Windoze - nor do I think it is right to use underpaid workers in other countries inferior wages for something easily done right here, without victimizing the poor.

But to each their own. Scanning is a basic, is easy and rewarding to do, and one can do whatever they want, without limitation - something that can't be done once the colour mapping of a digital scan is subjected to inferior Windoze based colour maps.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

I will NOT be undersold! 

I will scan your most precious slides for 10¢ each! No foolin' around here, kiddo. Best of all, your images stay in Canada, all work is done by real Canadians and all prices are in CDN $!

Here's a sample of my unretouched output, and a shot of my slide scanning operation. 

(OK, I did a little shadow/highlight tickle in PS).


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

ScanCafe certainly does have some good reviews, but your right that there is an possible risk.

As for the automatic feeds causing shredding I can tell you that with millions of scans we've never had a single issue with that - not sure what you're doing?

The main thing with a digitization service is time - in all likelyhood you don't have the time nor the desire to spend hours and hours and hours scanning photos, so it makes sense to have a company do this process for you. Canada is quickly moving to a time-crunch economy - services that save you time are services that will thrive. 

I know with our company 90% of the customers are regular joes, people that want their photos digitized for the protection it offers them (from damage/loss) or to use in presentation options (photobooks, digital picture frames, etc). Is the quality up to par with say an ultra high end museum scan? No, of course not - but 99% of people don't want to pay the dollar a scan either, they are perfectly happy paying us 5 cents each and getting their photos in digital format.

We've just started doing slide scanning, for 25 cents a piece. I'll have more info on that when we launch our slide scanning website as well. 

Overall, I can recommend that if you're looking for ultra super high quality, then pay for it. You buy a Cadillac for a reason, but many people love their civics. If you have the time and want it as a project then pick up a mid level epson unit, block off 3 weeks of your time and go at it  Its a fun and great thing to do!


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

scanman said:


> i will not be undersold!
> 
> I will scan your most precious slides for 10¢ each! No foolin' around here, kiddo. Best of all, your images stay in canada, all work is done by real canadians and all prices are in cdn $!
> 
> ...


lmao


----------



## hhk (May 31, 2006)

*Timely topic*

I've been scanning some negatives with my Epson Perfection Photo 4490 and no matter how carefully I clean the glass, I get these little dust marks. Any tips on preventing or touching them up?

I know about the clone tool in Photoshop but it would get real tedious correcting 5-10 of them per image.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

hhk said:


> I've been scanning some negatives with my Epson Perfection Photo 4490 and no matter how carefully I clean the glass, I get these little dust marks. Any tips on preventing or touching them up?
> 
> I know about the clone tool in Photoshop but it would get real tedious correcting 5-10 of them per image.


hhk, There's no safe automatic way to erase these blemishes at once. 
For prints, I use silverfast but even then, it's tedious pre-production work. 
Using Photoshop can be quicker if u learn how to use a tablet (wacom or similar), but you need to go over each one.

Sometimes you can get away with using a dust removal filter, but you have to be careful as the filters aren't discretionary - ie. I've seen beads in wedding dresses disappear. Doh! 

Scanning images is tedious period, but hiring a pro to do the work will cost more and your images will be done properly (and will be done with alot less stress to you


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

*How about Vuecsan software for one's scanner..??*



ScanMan said:


> BigDL said:
> 
> 
> > Any suggestions of a Scanner (Hardware/Software combinations best solution) and Software to do a reasonable job for a family archive./QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## sashmo (Oct 19, 2002)

I scanned in over 500 old slides. Took me for ever. I only scanned them in at 300 dpi. I thought that would be satisfactory for doing any possible printing. Now I wonder if I should have increased the dpi.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

hhk said:


> ...no matter how carefully I clean the glass, I get these little dust marks. Any tips on preventing or touching them up?


Same spots in the same place? If so, dirt on your mirrors or on the lens. A whole other discussion...

Otherwise, dust on or under the glass isn't as critical as debris on your actual negs. An anti-static cloth or a gentle puff of compressed air, removes most loose grunge. Anything beyond this, requires chemicals and a bit of expertise – nothing you'd want to incorporate into your regular workflow.

Whatever ICE leaves behind, you're going to have to deal with after the scan. Personally, I don't recommend dust removal during the scanning process. That's just guaranteeing baked-in softness.

Effective dirt and dust removal is a broad subject. But here's a little technique that'll help you clean up a few nicks here and there, without cloning, patching, or getting into serious layer building and painting.

All you use is the history brush.

Start by selecting Photoshop's dust and scratch filter and picking a setting that kills the dirt, yet retains most of your images's "grain". Never mind edge and detail softness, just try to keep the texture. Your settings here will depend on the resolution of your scan. The higher the resolution, the greater the radius, etc,. Play around, you'll figure it out. Click OK and your image will go soft. Relax.

Now, your dust and scratches choice is of course going to appear in your history palette. Click in the box next to it to select it, thereby making that history state the source for your history brush.

Then click back to the previous state in the history palette. Your image will no longer be soft overall.

Select the history brush from your tools palette. Adjust your brush size. Make sure it's set to normal and full opacity, and paint over just your artifacts.

There you go. It's one of my go-to techniques for fast and dirty photo scanning work. Less tedious and dare I say... almost fun. You can smooth out a few wrinkles while you're at it, too.


----------



## hhk (May 31, 2006)

*Thanks*

Thanks for the tips. I'll try them out this week and see what results I get.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

First of all, I will thank everyone for the helpful suggestions.

After reviewing the posts and checking online for availability and price and because of ScanMan’s post I was led to Epson Canada’s website to check out V 700. After poking around I found a refurbished V500 for considerably cheaper. I fear I may be spoiled by Apples refurbs and I am wondering if anyone has purchased refurbished products from Epson. 



Epson Webpage said:


> “Refurbished Products: All sales are final. These are products that have been returned to Epson. They have been inspected and tested to ensure they perform properly. Some may have minor blemishes due to handling. They are available only while quantities last. Refurbished products may or may not contain a media pack or the same software package as new models. In order to provide these savings and to move final quantities, we cannot accept returns unless the product arrived damaged or defective in which case your remedy is replacement with the same model or equivalent. See Terms of Sale and Conditions.”


A minor blemish(es) I can live with. I do not understand what the term “media pack” means. Could someone help me out by defining that term. 

The phrase “the same software package as new models” Could that mean let’s say Photoshop Elements could be version 7 rather than version 8 that would ship with a new scanner or is it a software disc is missing and tough luck?

I don’t want to save a penny when it is really costing dollars by being “cheap”

Any thoughts?


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Epson Scanners usually ship with an outdated version of PS Elements. In this case that would probably be Elements 6 not 8.

Beyond that call Epson and ask. Have a list in front of you or you sure to forget to ask at least one thing.


----------



## jmlachance (Nov 6, 2005)

*One more question*

. OK, winter's here and I'm ready to tackle this once more. 
As the original poster, i've made notes on all the suggestions and will be shopping around for a scanner.
Last winter I had my daughter scan about a hundred photos on a HP scanner (that's now bit the dust) in exchange for an old eMac I found on the side of the road (another story altogether).

I see that scanning negatives was mentioned a few times. So I can scan a colour negative and it will save it as a colour image? If this is so, will it work for black and white negatives?


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

jmlachance said:


> So I can scan a colour negative and it will save it as a colour image? If this is so, will it work for black and white negatives?


Yes and yes – it will be selectable in your scanning SW. Digital ICE, however, will not work on your B&W negs. Depending on their condition, scanning B&Ws can be a rewarding experience, or pure pain.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Although it takes longer per scan, I recommend scanning at the highest OPTICAL level your scanner supports, saved in a lossless format like TIFF. Put these "raw scans" on another drive, burn em to DVD or some such. You'll thank me when you find you can do huge enlargements for anniversary posters, or find that you don't have to re-scan 1,000 slides because you originally scanned them in too lo-res for anything but the web.

Do your corrections etc on a smaller, more manageable JPEG version. Resize, crop, etc as needed for whatever project you're working on, but keep the original, huge, high-res "master scan" set aside. You or your descendants will almost certainly need to come back to it someday, and by then the original media (slides, pics, film) may be gone for good.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Scanning resolutions can be a matter of personal preference. I have scanned a series of 35mm negs at 300 dpi. Gave me a fairly quick image that was big enough to use for evaluation purposes. This was a series of about 200 negs. I then went back and re-scanned the dozen negs that I wanted to do something with at much higher resolutions. Overall I saved quite a bit of time and had images big enough to create 40 image/page index sheets of that series of negs.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

I realize the last post of this thread is over two years old, but I wanted to find out what the current thinking is on this subject.

I have a bunch of 35mm mounted slides that I want to digitize.
The dedicated 35mm scanners sem to be either crap if they are in the $100 to $200 price range (based on user reviews) or prices for good ones are in the stratosphere for those made )or at east marketed) by the traditional camera companies.
I was about to try to resurrect my old UMAX scanner to see if I can get it working with OS 10.6 but the software for that seems to be close to $100 and then I still have a scanner with pretty old technology.
Just before I found this thread I came across some Epson slide scanners like the V500 which is also mentioned here.
Any first hand experience with that to scan 35mm slides?

One specific thing I was wondering about - the slides I have are all mounted, either in cardboard frames or even glass frames.
That means that the image being scanned is not flush on the scanner bed like a piece of paper or photo but a fraction of a millimeter above it.
Does the scanner somehow compensate for that so everything ends up being in focus?

And - any other options to look at in the Epson V500 price range?


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

krs said:


> I realize the last post of this thread is over two years old, but I wanted to find out what the current thinking is on this subject.
> 
> I have a bunch of 35mm mounted slides that I want to digitize.
> The dedicated 35mm scanners sem to be either crap if they are in the $100 to $200 price range (based on user reviews) or prices for good ones are in the stratosphere for those made )or at east marketed) by the traditional camera companies.
> ...


The real question is are you looking to maximize your efficiency or your quality?

You're best quality is going to be with renting or purchasing a dedicated slide scanner - likely a coolscan. Many people buy, scan, and flip - i.e. buy for 1200, scan, then sell for 1200. Net cost is zero in many cases, but has potential to be a bit. You can rent similar scanners from henrys, vistek, etc. 

If you're going with an Epson unit you have a slight quality sacrifice, but have the ability to scan multiple slides (which is only possible with the feeder attachment on the nikon). These are cheaper (can get the v750 in the $550-$700 range) and provide excellent quality. 

The scanner should be adjusting the focus for the height of the slide off the glass - typically you can edit this on higher end scanners but it should be auto. 

If you're looking in the v500 price range then you're likely not prioritizing quality (and you really don't NEED to in many cases) - Another option is to outsource the entire project to a company (I run one, but many other options in a number of different price ranges). 

Try to plan everything out BEFORE you take on this proejct - 90% of people start a project like this, have no idea how much work it is, then end up ditching it - plan everything out and make sure you're giving yourself between 60 and 90 seconds per slide, more if you're doing any extensive edits, tagging, etc. 

Good luck!


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

> The real question is are you looking to maximize your efficiency or your quality?


\

Actually neither.
I want reasonable quality so I could print the odd photo as a 5x7 or maximum 8x10 in very special cases.
As to efficiency - problem is that I don't know how many photos I want digitized.
I was going to look at them and pick out the ones that are worth digitizing but I found out tonight that the projector bulb has bit the dust.
getting a replacement seems to be a bit pricey at around $80 for something I would use only a very short time.
But with a replacement bulb I could also try to just take a digital photo of the projected slide - that has been suggested in some discussion groups outside of ehMac.

These are all casual family photos - nothing professional - so spending a ton of money on a scanner for just that purpose is not an option.
Renting one may be an alternative - haven't looked at that option - thanks for the suggestion.


----------



## Paddy (Jul 13, 2004)

Krs, one of these days I have to take on the same project - I've got family slides from the 50s and 60s (mostly 2X2) and 35mm of my own from the 70s and 80s.

Vistek Coolscan rental:

coolscan - Pro Rentals at Vistek - Digital Equipment, SLRs Video Cameras - Vistek Toronto Calgary Canada

Note - there seems to be an issue with compatibility with OS 10.5 and up.

There are various ways around it:

Coolscan LS-5000 and Mac OS-X 10.6.6 - Photo.net Nikon Forum

Since I already own VueScan, that would likely be my route, if I rent this scanner. ScanMan, here at EhMac also does this sort of work and lives just a few blocks away, and has offered to do the scanning for me. Much will depend on how many slides I want to scan!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Rather than a new projector bulb look into a portable viewer. Back projects onto a small 8 inch screen and handles up to 40 slides in a go. Perfect for the sorting process. I will have one available late next summer. 

If you are in more of a hurry try the usual suspects. Wish I could remember what the official name is.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Paddy said:


> Krs, one of these days I have to take on the same project - I've got family slides from the 50s and 60s (mostly 2X2) and 35mm of my own from the 70s and 80s.
> 
> Vistek Coolscan rental:
> 
> ...


Also only available in Mississauga and Toronto not sure if that would suit krs...


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

krs said:


> \
> 
> Actually neither.
> I want reasonable quality so I could print the odd photo as a 5x7 or maximum 8x10 in very special cases.
> ...


As for viewing the slides, make a makeshift light box with a loupe (or magnify glass) from the dollar store to get a better idea of what you're looking at. 

Remember that the size you'd like to print is the determining factor of the resolution, not the quality. You can get a high resolution scan that is bad quality, or a great quality scan that is a low resolution. You should be aiming for a file that's in the 3000 DPI range. 

Honestly in your price range I'd suggest outsourcing (I know, I'm a bit biased!) My company (which I've advertised on here before, PhotoScanning.ca ) scans slides for 25¢ each - a nationwide low price. They are likely the price/quality ratio you're looking for - i.e. not professional level scans, but say a 7.5/10 on the quality scale at a very low price. If you're scanning 1000 slides, you'd run $250 (+tax, ship), which would save you approximately 20 hours of scanning and an expensive scanner rental. 

Other companies focus more on the quality (giving you a 9/10 or 10/10 quality) in the $1.00 to $2.00 per scan range - I'm not down playing these companies at all as they do FANTASTIC work (I refer a number of customers to them and hear nothing but good things) but they serve a different clientele then us. 

There are some people who do projects like these because the enjoy them - they love tweaking their photos, scanning them, etc. There are others that just don't want to throw the slides out, want them as gifts, etc - they just want them done. That's why I'm saying truly understand the magnitude of the project, you'll curse the invention of slides and scanners if you do it yourself with a few thousand & don't love the process!


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

I decided really short term late last night to buy the Epson V500 scanner and see how that goes.
Basically because it was on sale, I had a coupon to bring the price down even more, it includes the ICE software and Adobe Elements which I was interested in getting anyway and if it doesn't work out I can probably sell the scanner for what I paid for it.

That way I have the option to scan different slides at different resolutions depending what I want to do with the image later.
Cost wasn't much more than a one-day rental of one of these sophisticated slide scanners...and a one-day rental wouldn't have been enough.
Not that I have that many slides, but I can imagine that it would become pretty tedious if one wanted to do all of them at once in a day.
So doing batches in one or two hour intervals seems reasonable and I hope to learn something doing that as well.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

If you can reduce the glare off the old photos or project the slide on to a screen, I would think just taking a picture of the picture with your iPhone is probably the fastest (and least expensive) option for old photo/slide conversions these days.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

krs said:


> I decided really short term late last night to buy the Epson V500 scanner and see how that goes.
> Basically because it was on sale, I had a coupon to bring the price down even more, it includes the ICE software and Adobe Elements which I was interested in getting anyway and if it doesn't work out I can probably sell the scanner for what I paid for it.
> 
> That way I have the option to scan different slides at different resolutions depending what I want to do with the image later.
> ...


I like that idea and it will probably be more than adequate for your needs.

I would still suggest a presort. Personally I hate using lupes hence my previous suggestion of the small back projection system. I think Sawyer made the one I was using but I am not sure.

Otherwise you can do 20-50 slides a day with quick scans and go from there as to what you really want to re-scan and print.

NOTE: I can usually get a good 8x10 print from slide scans done on a nine year old Epson mid-line scanner. Five by sevens are a snap. Don't have ICE, but Elements has proven adequate if time consuming, for dealing with the occasional damaged original.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

This will be a fun project since nobody has looked at these slides in the last 20 ears or so.
Just looked at a few, thet are dated Dec '82 on the slide frame.

I think sorting will be pretty straight forward even when just looking at the slide itself - slides with peopple in them scan others probably not.
I'll try a crude scan by filling the complete scanner bed with slides - that might be anoter way to sort them.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

The Epson V500 arrived this afternoon.
Included besides the scanner of course and the standard Epson installation software was ABBYY OCR software, ICE capability incorporated with the scanner software and two separate Photoshop Elements 9 DVDs, a Windows one and a Mac one.
Installation of all the Epson software (everything except Photoshop Elements) took exactly 10 minutes on a one year old Mini - doing the mechanical part, unpacking, removing all the tape, plugging in the cables etc. was another 10 minutes - and then I was up and running.

Tried a few slides, the slide holder can do four slides at a time, no more.
But one can scan each slide separately and thus also adjust the image separately.
Scanning takes a bit longer than I expected - 2 minutes at 600 DPI - results are pretty good considering the slides are 30 years old and are faded a bit due to age.
I run the colour resoration and ICE on the scanner and then adjust the image using the basic tools that come with Preview.

So far so good.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Congrats krs, glad you are thus far satisfied with your solution.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

krs said:


> The Epson V500 arrived this afternoon.
> Included besides the scanner of course and the standard Epson installation software was ABBYY OCR software, ICE capability incorporated with the scanner software and two separate Photoshop Elements 9 DVDs, a Windows one and a Mac one.
> Installation of all the Epson software (everything except Photoshop Elements) took exactly 10 minutes on a one year old Mini - doing the mechanical part, unpacking, removing all the tape, plugging in the cables etc. was another 10 minutes - and then I was up and running.
> 
> ...


congrats KRS.

I always tell clients that this process has 2 parts:

1. the actual scanning

but more importantly, 2. the memories! sorting, organizing and then editing the photos is all part of remembering, laughing, maybe crying and overall, enjoying the moments captured on those slides.

enjoy that part especially


----------



## Bobby Clobber (Aug 26, 2008)

I can only echo that last comment. I just finished scanning about 2000 photos and cataloging about 4500 in total. It has been a long-term labour of love. And it was the memories that came back to me that were the most valuable part of this project. Like living my life all over again. Good luck on your project KRS.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

I need to add a bit more info about my experience with the Epson V500.

For one, the long scanning time I mentioned earlier, about 2 minutes at 300 DPI, according to the manual is caused by using ICE.
I turned ICE off, only had colour correcion on, and the scanning time was reduced to about 30 seconds.

However, with ICE the scanned image is definitely better so I will probably keep using it.
Colour correction also does a nice job on these 30 year old slides - it gets rid of te yellow tinge, brings some colour back and I do the rest on the digital image.

All of this was done in the "Home" mode
I then tried the "professional" mode and it is far superior to the home mode.
For One I can save the settings for target pixture size etc. which I couldn't with "Home" mode.
But more importantly, I can set up the scanning of all four slides ahead of time and the scanner will then do all four at once.
Settings on each of the four slides are independent - I can colour correct some and not others, crop them individually etc. and then scan all at once sequentially while I do something else. Haven't times that yet but it seems to be faster than the "Home" mode.


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

krs said:


> I need to add a bit more info about my experience with the Epson V500.
> 
> For one, the long scanning time I mentioned earlier, about 2 minutes at 300 DPI, according to the manual is caused by using ICE.
> I turned ICE off, only had colour correcion on, and the scanning time was reduced to about 30 seconds.
> ...


KRS,

*DO NOT SCAN SLIDES AT 300 OR 600 DPI!!!!!!*

This is incredibly small for slides - you need to be scanning at a minimum of 2000 DPI, more towards 3000 DPI to get useable files.

DPI is dots per inch - or in this case, pixels per inch. Unless you've outlined a specific output size @ 300 DPI then you're producing extremely small files for slides that are practically useless.

35mm slides are 24 mm x 36mm (approximately 1 inch by 1.5 inches) - this means that your file sizes at 300 DPI are going to be 300 x 450 pixels - effectively thumbnails. 

Scan to the resolution you're looking to output the files at - i.e. if you want to print them at 4x6, then you'll have to scan them with enough dots (pixels) per inch to print at 300 DPI at the final size. If you're scanning at 2000 DPI then you're getting a file approximately 2000 x 3000, which is MUCH more workable, but still not really workable for blowing them up to canvas size (you can redo those ones specifically). 

I promise you that if you continue scanning these at 300 DPI / 600 DPI you'll be disappointed - those are the normal scanning resolutions for prints, but prints are much larger then slides so you are getting many many many more pixels. 

If you continue to scan at 300 DPI, then your printing resolution would be the same size as the original slide - i.e. the largest you'd print them without loosing quality is the original size of the slide, 1"x1.5". 

I hope you read this before you scan to many!!!! 

By the way, what ICE does is basically take a prescan that is looking for the light reflecting through the slide, then using algorithms to repair the areas that block light (dust, scratches, etc). It is very useful and saves time in elements, if you prefer that.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

matdwyer said:


> KRS,
> 
> *DO NOT SCAN SLIDES AT 300 OR 600 DPI!!!!!!*
> 
> ...


I appreciate your post and I also thought I neede to scan at 2000 or 3000 DPI but that is not the case.
In fact, I can't even scan at any resolution higher than 1600 DPI because at anything larger I can't make the target marquee small enough for the slide, I end up with a black frame around it since the scanner scans part of the slide mount.
The reason I ended up scanning at 300 DPI is because that is the preset if one selects a "rinter" as the final desination. I can go to "Other" and select up to 4800 DPI but then the marquee covers more than the slide proper.
With the 300 DPI setting and a target of a 5x7 print I get beautiful results - at least on the monitor. Image size is 550 to 750 KB with jpg compression and the image size is 2100 x 1500 pixels.
I tried two scans at 1600 DPI, the first thing I got was a warning message that the resolution selected was too high and when I chose the "Continue anyway" button I ended up with a image 11000 x 8000 pixels and a image size of 269 MB in tiff and 13.1 MB as a jpg
I wasn't really planning to print any of these pictures, but I'll print one to see how they turn out.

Just a PS - when scanning slides with this printer, one selects the *destination* resolution and *destination* target size - maybe that explains things.


----------



## matdwyer (Oct 5, 2008)

krs said:


> With the 300 DPI setting and a target of a 5x7 print I get beautiful results - at least on the monitor. Image size is 550 to 750 KB with jpg compression and the image size is 2100 x 1500 pixels.


Yup, that's the key - you're not actually scanning at 300 DPI, but your output is 5x7 @ 300 DPI. No need to confuse you by explaining any further just glad you're doing it correctly :clap:


----------

