Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 12 Aug 2010 (Thursday) 10:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

scanning photos

 
morpheus6d9
Senior Member
Avatar
433 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Aug 12, 2010 10:37 |  #1

I'm designing a website for a friend he is a tattoo artist he took the majority of his photos using film what is the best way to scan the photos ?

thanks


50D | 60mm f/2.8 macro |Tokina 12-24 f/4 | Nifty-Fifty | SB-20 | 580 EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,095 posts
Likes: 1595
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Aug 12, 2010 10:46 |  #2

Negatives? Slides? 4x5s?

Best way is to get the best scanner for the job. If you have negatives or slides a film scanner works best. If they are prints, a good quality drum scanner is the best way, but those beasts are expensive.

For one more budget minded, a good flatbed scanner with film capability is the way to go. Check out the Canoscan 8800 or 9000 (external link) works well as does the Epson V500 (external link).


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NinetyEight
"Banned for life"
Avatar
3,188 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 22
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Dorset - England
     
Aug 12, 2010 11:08 |  #3

A drum scanner for a web site image is a bit over the top IMO :-)

For prints a typical flatbed will do the job, for transparencies or negatives a slightly more expensive model will also do 35mm film.


Kev

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChasP505
"brain damaged old guy"
Avatar
5,566 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2006
Location: New Mexico, USA
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:25 |  #4

morpheus6d9 wrote in post #10707997 (external link)
...what is the best way to scan the photos ?

I use an old and inexpensive Epson Perfection 2480 Photo. It has an adapter for scanning 35mm slides and negatives. I get very good results.

I always scan in 48-bit color at 600dpi. With a slide or film, 600dpi is good enough for web images or small prints. I turn all adjusts, auto or manual, off in the scanner software, preferring to do all adjustments in Photoshop. In Photoshop, I save as a 16bit TIFF in Adobe RGB and edit. (But if the source of the scan is a very good photo or slide, 8 bit is perfectly fine.) The final image output will be converted for size, bit depth, color space, as needed.


Chas P
"It doesn't matter how you get there if you don't know where you're going!"https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=10864029#po​st10864029

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MikeThompson
Senior Member
Avatar
262 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Mar 2009
Location: On the road somewhere between the Atlantic and Pacific
     
Aug 15, 2010 18:15 |  #5

Chas, When scanning at 600 dpi, how large a print can you make with good results?


Mike
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming....."WOW, WHAT A RIDE".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,642 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 523
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Aug 15, 2010 18:55 |  #6

The output of the scan will depend on the quality of the original print and of the scanner itself. If you can take the file and enlarge it to, say, 100% and it looks decent (after maybe applying some sharpening) then it should give a "good" print at 300 ppi (double the length and width of the original print) and you can try a lower resolution such as 200 ppi.

I've found, though, that printing scans of prints does tend to break down when printing, say, an 8x10 but that was in the "old days" of scanners -- the early '90s when scanners didn't have as high resolutions as they have achieved over the years and when inkjet printers were in their infancy and also didn't have the resolution they now have.

Do your scanning and print some tests and judge for yourself! I would think it would be great to have say a good quality 11x14 or 11x17 print from a 35mm shot whether scanned or directly printed.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChasP505
"brain damaged old guy"
Avatar
5,566 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2006
Location: New Mexico, USA
     
Aug 15, 2010 21:11 |  #7

dreamcatcher1450 wrote in post #10727070 (external link)
Chas, When scanning at 600 dpi, how large a print can you make with good results?

When scanning a 35mm slide, you can easily print an 8x12 or larger at 300ppi. If scanning a print, YMMV depending on the size of the print.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


More important is scanning in 16 bit mode. After editing the scan, you can convert to 8 bit and save as a JPG.

Chas P
"It doesn't matter how you get there if you don't know where you're going!"https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=10864029#po​st10864029

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

1,245 views & 0 likes for this thread
scanning photos
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jeroe
806 guests, 397 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.