Scanning

[becca-becca]

We are starting a rather large project: scanning all of my DH family's old photos (transferring them out of damagin albums) and scanning in all of our pre-digital photos. We have about a 2 year old scanner that is very slow. I would like to be able to:
1. Get the best possible resolution (within price reason >$350.00)
2. Get it done as quickly as possible due to large amount of photos
3. Be able to fix photos easily and quickly

The info at Best Buy, Office Depot, etc. is overwhelming me. We have a Vista laptop and a XP PC. Does anyone have any suggestions? I would appreciate any help. Thanks!

 

[JR6ooo4]

I think you just want a high resolution. Optical resolution not an interpolated digital resolution.

I have printed good size from our old 1200x1200 DPI scanner. I think $350 or less should get you a nice scanner.

How many pics are planning on scanning. I did close to 300 from our honeymoon. I used the laptop and set the scanner on the end table next to me.

One problem I had was scanning pics that have a glossy textured surface. the light would reflect back at all angles similar to a bicycle reflector. One out of four would come out ok.

Mikeeee

 

[becca-becca]

I have no idea how many photos it will be in the end, probably hundreds if not thousands. I want good quality, but because of the amount I would also like speed. I don't know if speed is due to the computer or scanner. If it is the scanner, what technical description do you look at to see what speed it scans at?

 

[MICKEY88]

I think you just want a high resolution. Optical resolution not an interpolated digital resolution.

I have printed good size from our old 1200x1200 DPI scanner. I think $350 or less should get you a nice scanner.

How many pics are planning on scanning. I did close to 300 from our honeymoon. I used the laptop and set the scanner on the end table next to me.

One problem I had was scanning pics that have a glossy textured surface. the light would reflect back at all angles similar to a bicycle reflector. One out of four would come out ok.

Mikeeee

really... a scanner with a photo setting should eliminate the reflections, or at least minimize them drastically


paint shop pro photo x2 has a feature for scanning multiple photos. you can put as many as will fit in the scanner, scan once then seperate and save as seperate images using PSPP X2

 

[safetymom]

The Epson photo scanners would be great for what you are trying to do. They can see separate photos on the scanning bed and save them as individual files.

You also need to think about what size you will be scanning them at. Will you be scanning to reprint? Will you just be looking at them on the computer? It is better to scan them large in case you ever want to print than to scan them small. It is hard to blow up a small image to large.

I would not look at scanner with an automatic feed to speed things up. Do you really want to get your precious photos caught in the feeder?

With the Epson it tells you after a preview scan the size of the image, then you can tell it what size you want the image after scanning. It will figure out the optimum resolution to scan the image at. Why you want to do this way is that you get a file with exactly the amount of information it needs to reprint the image. If you just go and set it for the highest resolution you will get a huge file that sometimes is way too much information resulting in a lower quality image. It also will take much longer and the file will be huge.

You should also be looking at the Epson scanners because they offer several great features. Color restoration will restore the colors in those faded photos so they look like you just took them. All you do is check a box and it does it automatically. Much easier than working in Photoshop. Digital Ice will also repair dust, scratches in photos. It doesn't get all of them but the repair work you might have to do is minimal.

I love my Epson scanners and they do a great job.

 

[boBQuincy]

Reducing the resolution saves a lot of time. The general rule is that there is no more than about 300 dpi available from a print, any more resolution is just taking up space.

Scanning more than one at a time is a good idea. Making a cardboard template (or even lines of tape on the scanner glass) to keep them lined up may make the process a lot easier.

Here is a good website to do some basic research on scanning:
http://www.scantips.com/

 

[0bli0]

if you get a scanner with IR dust reduction, you'll save tons of time removing dust - that is if you care about the dust.
remember that if you do scan more than one at a time, the gamma (brightness) may be off for some of the photos, so you might lose some detail. try to group similarly exposed images together.

 

[alan]

If you can, you are WAY better scanning the negatives rather than prints. Why? Well, there are a couple of reasons:

1. there's a lot more detail in the negatives than the prints - all those dark areas that just look black in a print may have good stuff you can restore by scanning the negative, and

2. you'd be amazed how poorly-focused some enlargers have been over the years!

I scaned about 150 35mm films over the course of around 18 months, and am pleased with the results. I used a Canon FS4000US as the scanner.

Notes:

* be prepared to use a TONNE of storage space - start buying a new hard disk now

* get a backup plan in place - you won't be wanting to do this lot again!

* don't buy a negative scanner that doesn't have a "cleanup" function, no matter how clean you think your negatives are

* check out VueScan from http://www.hamrick.com

* also check out eBay. A lot of people buy a negative scanner, scan their collection then have nothing left to do with their scanner except sell it on...

regards,
/alan

 

[Groucho]

Definitely, the negatives are the way to go if they are available.

Epson has one <$200 scanner that has Digital ICE (the IR dust reduction that 0bli0 mentioned), it has holders for negatives and slides as well. This is probably the best bang for the buck... their next model up with ICE is about twice the price, I think.

For really good negative/slide scanning, though, you almost have to go for a Nikon Coolscan, $500 is the cheapest model, and it's only negatives and slides; it won't scan prints.

 

[alan]

Having sold my FS4000US, I now have an Epson RX640 (it's a printer as well as scanner); it seems to do some form of negative cleanup after processing. VueScan does an okay job with it; the supplied software ramps the saturation up to an unnatural level.

Some of the top-end Canon flat bed scanners can scan and split up an entire film's worth of negatives in a "wunner" (Glasgow term meaning "in one go")

regards,
/alan