I scan depending on what I need to do with the picture. Sometimes 300dpi, sometimes as high at 1200 or even higher - if I need to do some fine editing of the pic (cleanup, archiving old photos etc...).
I've not printed any scanned photos, but I am archiving some old photos for my grandparents.
I've been scanning them at the highest the scanner will go (2400 iirc) to tiff, then doing all the touching up of the photo at monstrously high resolution.
After that you can rescale them down to whatever resolution you need for that particular photo (in this case they were going down to a very low resolution JPG for a digital picture frame) but if you have plenty of storage space you've then got a very high res tiff for printing it out to any size you want later.
this is probably over the top for 99% of people, but these are very old photos that need substantial amounts of repair in some cases, and being a small piece of history it seems right to do it "properly"
this is probably over the top for 99% of people, but these are very old photos that need substantial amounts of repair in some cases, and being a small piece of history it seems right to do it "properly"
I 100% agree with you. It's all down to what you're doing with the pics. I have been doing exactly the same with old photos. Having such a high resolution for old pics really does help with touching them up, before scaling them down for whatever needs.
BTW, anyone wanting to scan, I highly recommend the Epson range of scanners. The way they scan is different to most other scanners and are much better for photos.
You might be better off renting a Nikon CoolScan and scanning the negs. It's a time consuming process though. And yes, I said renting.
someone told me you can send of negs to get them digitally converted. no idea where though, and i think it was for people with loads to do. pricey but you pay for the effort.
someone told me you can send of negs to get them digitally converted. no idea where though, and i think it was for people with loads to do. pricey but you pay for the effort.
indeed, there are companies that restore archive old photographs for you (for a lot of money of course, it's a lot of man hours to do it)
there's not much effort involved, just time. and it's something for me to do all night when the insomnia attacks, so I plough through them fairly quickly
they are fast! but then they presumably have a lot of practice :)
that sounds about right actually, the photos I was doing (not counting scanning time) took from half an hour for a reasonably young (70s) 'modern' type photo with just a bit of dust, to around two and a half hours for a particular old wartime one with creases, and 60 years of dust, dirt and thumb-prints.
and this is just me with no fancy software, doing the best I can with it, it's certainly not perfect.
Comments
Ta. That could be very good news...
I scan depending on what I need to do with the picture. Sometimes 300dpi, sometimes as high at 1200 or even higher - if I need to do some fine editing of the pic (cleanup, archiving old photos etc...).
It's all down to the task at hand.
I've been scanning them at the highest the scanner will go (2400 iirc) to tiff, then doing all the touching up of the photo at monstrously high resolution.
After that you can rescale them down to whatever resolution you need for that particular photo (in this case they were going down to a very low resolution JPG for a digital picture frame) but if you have plenty of storage space you've then got a very high res tiff for printing it out to any size you want later.
this is probably over the top for 99% of people, but these are very old photos that need substantial amounts of repair in some cases, and being a small piece of history it seems right to do it "properly"
I 100% agree with you. It's all down to what you're doing with the pics. I have been doing exactly the same with old photos. Having such a high resolution for old pics really does help with touching them up, before scaling them down for whatever needs.
BTW, anyone wanting to scan, I highly recommend the Epson range of scanners. The way they scan is different to most other scanners and are much better for photos.
someone told me you can send of negs to get them digitally converted. no idea where though, and i think it was for people with loads to do. pricey but you pay for the effort.
that would involve having negatives to work with, I don't know if they even exist :)
indeed, there are companies that restore archive old photographs for you (for a lot of money of course, it's a lot of man hours to do it)
there's not much effort involved, just time. and it's something for me to do all night when the insomnia attacks, so I plough through them fairly quickly
they are fast! but then they presumably have a lot of practice :)
that sounds about right actually, the photos I was doing (not counting scanning time) took from half an hour for a reasonably young (70s) 'modern' type photo with just a bit of dust, to around two and a half hours for a particular old wartime one with creases, and 60 years of dust, dirt and thumb-prints.
and this is just me with no fancy software, doing the best I can with it, it's certainly not perfect.