Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing
Thread started 17 Nov 2010 (Wednesday) 02:30
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Scan or photograph old photos?

 
hania
Senior Member
912 posts
Joined Nov 2004
Staffordshire, UK
Nov 17, 2010 02:30 |  #1

Any ideas which may give the better results?

Scanning will takes ages but can do a whole sheet at a time - these are photos from the 1940's and so are only about 3x2 in.

photographing - can get in really close with macro lens - but have to do each individually - could do a whole page i suppose but harder to get exactly parallel.


any ideas ? not sure if this is in right place; I did try searching forums but didn't find anything.


Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
crn3371
Cream of the Crop
crn3371's Avatar
7,198 posts
Joined Mar 2005
SoCal, USA
Nov 17, 2010 08:50 |  #2

I'd get an inexpensive flatbed scanner. They should scan fairly quick as you don't need to scan at a very high resolution for prints. 300 dpi, 600 dpi max.




LOG IN TO REPLY
ChasP505
"brain damaged old guy"
ChasP505's Avatar
5,566 posts
Joined Dec 2006
New Mexico, USA
Nov 17, 2010 10:27 |  #3

hania wrote in post #11299077external link
Any ideas which may give the better results?.

Scan. But first get Ctein's book, Digital Restoration from Start to Finish, 2nd Edition.

Also Katrin Eismann's Photoshop Restoration & Retouching.


Chas P
"It doesn't matter how you get there if you don't know where you're going!"http://photography-on-the.net ...p?p=10864029#post10​864029

LOG IN TO REPLY
mbellot
"My dog ate my title"
mbellot's Avatar
3,344 posts
Joined Jul 2005
The Miami of Canada - Chicago!
Nov 17, 2010 10:27 as a reply to crn3371's post |  #4

The other issue with photographing the prints will be lighting/glare.

Get a scanner, it will be much faster and give more consistent results.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Wilt is an old fart who has extensive experience with many brands and many formats of cameras, and extensive lighting knowledge of both studio lighting and speedlights
Wilt's Avatar
35,922 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Nov 17, 2010 10:45 |  #5

I got curious about the relative quality, so I just did this quick test. I took a 4x6 photo (originally shot on film), and scanned it with a Canon 8800F scanner at 600 dpi. Then I photographed it using a 40D with a Tamron 90mm f/2.5 macro lens at ISO 400 using f/4, mounted on tripod (admittedly shot under CFL, so I had to correct WB during post processing) as a RAW file converted with Lightroom 2.
As scanned, the result was 3512x2376 pixels; as shot the result was 3888x2592 pixels. I then took about a 10% section of each photo (leaving sections at 100%)...

As scanned...
http://i69.photobucket​.com ...ltonw/as_scannedpho​to.jpgexternal link
As shot...
http://i69.photobucket​.com ...ltonw/as_photograph​ed.jpgexternal link

Not sure if I could improve the photographic version with changes in post processing settings or by shooting at f/5.6, but based upon this quick test, I would not bother with the photography, but I would use the scanner.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost!
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention
Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,856 posts
Joined Feb 2005
enschede, netherlands
Nov 17, 2010 10:54 |  #6

I'd take a look at your sharpening / NR settings in LR. Or try DPP.
The "shot" image could be much better with decent sharpening IMO.


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpaceexternal link
Get Colormanagedexternal link
Twitterexternal link
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Wilt is an old fart who has extensive experience with many brands and many formats of cameras, and extensive lighting knowledge of both studio lighting and speedlights
Wilt's Avatar
35,922 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Nov 17, 2010 11:06 |  #7

René Damkot wrote in post #11300611external link
I'd take a look at your sharpening / NR settings in LR. Or try DPP.
The "shot" image could be much better with decent sharpening IMO.

Originally used sharpening settings of 132/1.7/57/49 in LR. I altered the Radius from 1.7 to 3.0 and output this, as shot...

http://i69.photobucket​.com .../i63/wiltonw/as_sho​t2.jpgexternal link

As scanned...
http://i69.photobucket​.com ...ltonw/as_scannedpho​to.jpgexternal link

No doubt futher tweaking of brightness and contrast, etc. in post processing could get more improvement from the as-shot version, but with the immediate and easy superiority of the scanned version, I don't think I'd want to spend the time and effort of tweaking the photographic process further. Way too easy to plunk the photo on the scanner, compared to having to mount it temporarily on a flat surface to photograph.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost!
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention
Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,856 posts
Joined Feb 2005
enschede, netherlands
Nov 17, 2010 11:29 |  #8

Wilt wrote in post #11300665external link
No doubt futher tweaking of brightness and contrast, etc. in post processing could get more improvement from the as-shot version, but with the immediate and easy superiority of the scanned version, I don't think I'd want to spend the time and effort of tweaking the photographic process further.

Agree with that.

Oh, and linked the images since they were larger then 1024 px ;)


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpaceexternal link
Get Colormanagedexternal link
Twitterexternal link
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Wilt is an old fart who has extensive experience with many brands and many formats of cameras, and extensive lighting knowledge of both studio lighting and speedlights
Wilt's Avatar
35,922 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Nov 17, 2010 11:34 |  #9

René Damkot wrote in post #11300803external link
Agree with that.

Oh, and linked the images since they were larger then 1024 px ;)

mea culpa! Thanks for remedying the oversight, René. My brain had 1280 as the max just now.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost!
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention
Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

LOG IN TO REPLY
ChasP505
"brain damaged old guy"
ChasP505's Avatar
5,566 posts
Joined Dec 2006
New Mexico, USA
Nov 17, 2010 11:59 as a reply to Wilt's post |  #10

I scan old photos at 600dpi, 48 bit mode (16 x 3), and either Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB.

When rephotographing, there's no reason not to use HDR techniques just like any other photography.


Chas P
"It doesn't matter how you get there if you don't know where you're going!"http://photography-on-the.net ...p?p=10864029#post10​864029

LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Goldmember
4,939 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Philadelphia, PA USA
Nov 17, 2010 12:33 |  #11

As long as your scanner is set up correctly and profiled, like your camera (in RAW) is, then color reproduction should be no problem. If your scanner produces color results that shift or cause issues in a color managed workflow, then you should address that before having to correct all of the images you scan. With photographing using RAW, you can shoot a CC target under the lighting conditions you set up (2 lights at 45 degrees to the photo surface) and get an accurate color profile that you can apply in batch to all of the images, in a RAW converter like LR.

If the photos are aged and may have issues with mounting for photography or may get damaged in a flatbed scanner, that may something to consider.

Kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​omexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
hania
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
912 posts
Joined Nov 2004
Staffordshire, UK
Nov 17, 2010 13:12 as a reply to kirkt's post |  #12

many thanks to you all - shall scan I think !


Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
"Amazingly attractive"
tonylong's Avatar
53,855 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Vancouver, WA USA
Nov 17, 2010 14:48 |  #13

I haven't used a scanner in some time, but I know that at least some scanning software will recognize multiple "objects" which could be a huge plus with smaller photos -- scan 6 or 8 snaps at a time and they are automatically saved as separate images.


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBaseexternal link
Wildlife project pics hereexternal link, Biking Photog shoots hereexternal link, "Suburbia" project hereexternal link! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics hereexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,856 posts
Joined Feb 2005
enschede, netherlands
Nov 17, 2010 15:11 |  #14

tonylong wrote in post #11301895external link
I haven't used a scanner in some time, but I know that at least some scanning software will recognize multiple "objects" which could be a huge plus with smaller photos -- scan 6 or 8 snaps at a time and they are automatically saved as separate images.

Photoshop (CS and newer I think) can do this as well.
http://help.adobe.com ...3e41001031ab64-762ea.htmlexternal link


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpaceexternal link
Get Colormanagedexternal link
Twitterexternal link
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

6,666 views & 0 likes for this thread
Scan or photograph old photos?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00093 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is Stfuson
480 guests, 388 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016