MarkČ
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Ping: Photo Print Restoration Experts... |
|
|
I'm hoping to find the best (within reason) solution for scanning a large
quantity of fairly old family photos.
These are old prints...not negatives or slides.
I have been most displeased with my standard flatbed, but assume there are
flatbeds out there that do a bang-up job(??). I've been amazed to discover
how many flatbed manufacturers don't even bother to *clean the under-side of
the glass*!! -Full of streaks and clouding, etc.
I've heard good things about Epson Perfection scanners, but if anyone here
has any expertise or opinion based on comparative experience, I'd appreciate
input.
I've considered simply setting up a mat where I take photos of the photos
with my DSLR, mounted downward on my tripod with good lighting...partly
because this would help to avoid the problem that seems to happen with
capturing the slightest dust on olf pictures when using a flatbed--meaning
tons of cloning.
Any experts out there?
Thank you for any help.
Mark
|
|
MarkČ
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: Ping: Photo Print Restoration Experts... |
|
|
Martin Brown wrote:
| Quote: | MarkČ wrote:
I'm hoping to find the best (within reason) solution for scanning a
large quantity of fairly old family photos.
These are old prints...not negatives or slides.
I have been most displeased with my standard flatbed, but assume
there are flatbeds out there that do a bang-up job(??). I've been
amazed to discover how many flatbed manufacturers don't even bother
to *clean the under-side of the glass*!! -Full of streaks and
clouding, etc.
What sort of scanner do you have at present? And what problems have
you encountered? If the glass is obviously dirty then you will get
patterns and marks on the scans - this is fixable by cleaning it.
|
I'm talking about streaks on the BACK side of the glass--internal side.
Any manufacturer who sells a scanner with residue on the inside of the glass
should be ashamed... :(
| Quote: |
I've heard good things about Epson Perfection scanners, but if
anyone here has any expertise or opinion based on comparative
experience, I'd appreciate input.
My HP scanner, despite the XP drivers being a complete pig works
pretty well and at 600dpi (seldom higher) will deliver scan quality
for archiving old print images. No point in scanning at sampling
rates too much beyond the effective image resolution of the original.
|
I'm not as concerned about resolution as I am about shadow detail and tonal
range.
-Even photos that are badly faded can be pulled back...provided you can
capture the subtle tonal differences that remain.
| Quote: | I've considered simply setting up a mat where I take photos of the
photos with my DSLR, mounted downward on my tripod with good
lighting...partly because this would help to avoid the problem that
seems to happen with capturing the slightest dust on olf pictures
when using a flatbed--meaning tons of cloning.
This can help on some heavily textured printing papers where a flatbed
scanner sees glare from cube corner reflectors in the dimples of the
paper. A very even light source and a tripod mounted digicam can be
useful for these - although squaring everything up is tricky.
You are obviously limited to 6-8Mpixel images which is similar when
compared to a 4x6 postcard scanned at 600dpi. But for bigger prints
the flatbed scanner will win hands down.
If the dust is there it gets recorded by scanning. That isn't the
fault of the scanner it is a problem with how you prepare the
pictures for scanning. Any defects will also be clearly reproduced.
|
While dust isn't the fault of the scanner, I have found that different
scanners handle dust quite differently.
One Canon scanner was particularly BAD in that any slight dust particle was
VERY illuminted, compared with another scanner. I believe the difference
was the use of LED lighting vs. a more conventional tube lighting in the
scanner. Other scanners have "Digital Ice" etc. to assist with it.
When I have many hundreds (perhaps thousands) of very old photos, I don't
want to have to clean them so completely as to take me years. There will
always be a bit of dust/residue, and I want to start with a scanner with
some capacity to deal with it.
| Quote: | Regards,
Martin Brown
|
Thank you for your resonse. |
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in