old photos

Do a Google search for ‘photo restoration’. I’ve done this and remember finding a number of places, some of which came with very good references. I didn’t need the service for any of mine, but if you have a scanned copy, I’d think you could get a feel for the reputation of the service by the way they respond to your request for evaluation.

Syble,

Is there any website you can put the photographs so that we can see it?

Wendy

My experience with some really bad images such as bent/scratched tintypes is to use the highest resolution you can stand. By stand I mean based on RAM, HD space, and just how long you can wait for a change to take place. When working on old photos I use a minimum of 600 dpi up to 1200.

FYI – if it’s really important (which it sounds like it is) and you’re willing to take the time I’d suggest scanning at a high resolution and then viewing the image blown up to actual pixels. Then clean it up pixel by pixel. I did that with a photo of an orange cat. It took HOURS but the results were better than anything I think a service could have done without breaking my bank account.

Finally, I nearly forgot, my wife likes to scan old photos in color even though the images are monochrome. Seems to get better results that way. They also print out better as sepiatones vs black and white.

wrote in message

I’ve been given a photo that was made in 1900, it is 6" x 7 1/2", faded,

and very weathered, it has not been in a frame, so it is covered with wear marks. I’ve repaired a few old photos using PE2, but I consider myself a beginner, and when I scanned this, and saw it on the monitor there was really no good areas to clone etc. It is the entire family of my gg grandparents, and I would love to have it repaired. Is there somewhere that I can send a scanned copy to see if it is repairable?

Why not upload a high-resolution scan of it here and let the talented folks of this forum play with it? Perhaps Grant Dixon can list it as a Challenge?

——- Kenny

I’d be happy to have a go…either as part of a challenge or otherwise…being an expat I have very few old photos to play with and I love doing it- they are all still in my parents house in London!

Susan S.

I second this idea.

Ron

wrote in message

Why not upload a high-resolution scan of it here and let the talented

folks of this forum play with it? Perhaps Grant Dixon can list it as a Challenge?

——- Kenny

How do I upload the photo so that you can view it, I liked to see what you think about it. Syble Glasscock

Hello Everyone, My name is Joe Hay and I live in VA. I found your forum today and have spent hours reading messages and checking out various links. I use an Olympus c-3000 Zoom, 3.4mp and an Epson Perfection 1650 scanner. My camera came with Adobe PE 1.0.1 & camedia master 2.0 I bought these and my IBM compatible desktop in 2001. I intended to buy the $800 version of Photoshop, until I started using Elements.Two years later I’m still learning how to use all the features! Ok, so I’m slow. My main use is to restore old photos. I’m the family historian & genealogist. I have tons of old photos waiting to be revived. I have been able to get some good results by trial & error and that’s what got me here. I repaired some minor flaws on a few pictures for a friend and she was thrilled with the results. Then she sent me her worst picture! What is the best way to beef up a really faded photo?
On another note: how much better is PE 2.0 than what I have?

Susan S, If you’d like a go at this one I will post it in an album on www.webshots.com You can look at my online albums by searching communities for my user name "bayonnejoe".

Syble, You might consider using them to upload your photo. They can be as large as 2400×2400.

Cheers, Joe

It would be great to have this as a challenge – so as to get everyones advice and tips. I have quite a few old photos, given to me by my mum, that I am just not sure where to start on or how to go about restoring them.

Syble – you need to find a place on the web to host your pictures – your ISP may have free webspace (which is what I usually do) there are various free or low cost photo sites – PBase is very popular (not free but low cost and pretty easy to use) – the site Joe mentions in his post appears to be free….

Joe – I’m happy to have a play around with somebody else’s pictures. I found your galleries on webshots.com – which picture would you like me to play with? (I would point out I am an amateur and regard this as a learning exercise and a chance to try out some of the techniques I’ve read about….you would get better results from a professional retoucher!)

Susan S.

Joe, if you’ve been reading some of the recent posts, you may have seen reference to Katrin Eismann’s wonderful book "Photoshop Restoration and Retouching" – you may want to look into that. As it was written for full Photoshop, some of the techniques are more difficult to do with Elements – but not impossible. The first edition of her book would be a great addition to your library – may be available used through amazon.com or halfpricebooks.com.

Chuck

p.s. Are you from Bayonne, NJ? I worked there briefly in the mid 80’s and loved it!

Hello-
I have an old B&W photo of my Mom that I spilled apple juice on some time ago, & have been "Chomping at the Bit" to fix it(A hard lesson). And this is the only copy I have. The photo is a 3 by 4 inch with a white(dirty) 1/4" border. I’ve scanned it into PSE several times, but really don’t know what resolution to use. Should I set my Epson Perfection 2400 reso in Twain(Smart Panel) before scanning it into PSE, & if so, what resolution is best for this size photo. I’m not to that point yet, but I may give in & let someone who is willing to give a go at it. I’ve had my PSE about a year, & have been using the clone stamp a lot, but I can’t go any further without getting a good book. So, think I’ll buy "Hidden Powers" by Lynch. Anyway, all input is welcomed. Thanks.

Les, the target range for resolution when printing is between 150 and 300ppi. When I’m working on these old photos, if I want to print at essentially the same size as the original, I scan at 300ppi. I often will scan at a higher res if I think I might want to enlarge the picture or crop out just a part and print that crop at a larger size. Basically, you choose your resolution based on the size finished size you want. If I want to double the size, I double the resolution so when I increase the dimensions (with Resample NOT checked) I still have a 300ppi image to print. Below is a link to a scanning calculator that a number of people use. Once you get the hang of the concept you won’t need it, though.

<http://www.image-access.net/calc/index.html>

Now, depending on how comfortable you already feel using Elements, Richard Lynch’s book may or may not be your best choice for your first book. It’s great, but it’s definitely geared toward the intermediate user and won’t go into some of the real basic stuff. I love it, and I have it, but I just wanted to warn you so you won’t run the risk of being disappointed. There have been a couple of good threads during the past week on books. You might want to do a search for "books" and see what pops up.

For scanning in photos I’ve generally scanned in at a resolution that gives you around 300dpi at the final largest size that you are likely to print it at. (assuming that this doesn’t go above the maximum optical resolution of the scanner). I don’t have an Epson scanner so I can’t give advice on the particular settings to use

<http://www.scantips.com/>
has all sorts of useful information about scanning.

Susan S.

Wow! What quick responses – The other forums I go to take at least several hours. Guess it’s because it’s Adobe related. This is a terrific forum, & thanks so much Beth & Susan for the tips & links – I’ll definitely go there right away.

In my case, I scan at the full optical resolution of my scanner — which is only 600ppi — so that I have maximum information with which to work.

That way, I have ultimate flexibility with end-use, as I have enough pixels to almost triple-enlarge the original image size, and can easily down-sample if so desired.

I am especially fussy about getting maximum resolution on scans of original images which may be borrowed, or to which I do not have ready access.

Byron

Thanks Byron-
So, what you’re saying is that if my scanner has 1200 X 2400 ability {Main Scan= 1200dpi; Micro Step(Sub Scan)= 2400dpi}, then no matter what size the photo is – You always scan at the highest resolution of the scanner – Which in my case, (even though the selected photo is only a 3 X 4 inch) would be set at 1200dpi – Right?

Yes, that is what he said, Les. You’ll develop your own preferences as you go along and gain experience. It is always better to resample downwards if you have an image file with a resolution that’s too high than to upsample.

Just to add to Beth’s comment. You don’t always need or want to scan at the highest resolution. Scanning higher than what you need means a larger file size and a greater burden on your processor and system resources.

Unless you’re trying to enlarge the image, I think you’ll find 300 to 600 more than adequate for most images. I usually use 300 for scanning prints unless I have a specific need for something higher. I find some images do require 600 to preserve detail and some don’t. As you work more with these images, you’ll develop your own preferences.

Bob

wrote
<You always scan at the highest resolution of the scanner – Which in my case, (even though the selected photo is only a 3 X 4 inch) would be set at 1200dpi – Right?

Les,

Yes.

From a purely technical standpoint, higher pixel density in the scan means greater fidelity.

However, given that these pixels will, eventually, be used to represent the image to the human eye, there is a point of diminishing gains, which you will need to find for yourself.

Since my old HP-3c scanner has a maximum optical density of 600ppi, that’s what I use. If I had a 1200ppi scanner, it is entirely possible that I would use something other than the max.

I don’t think that anyone is telling you that a particular number is "right", but rather that there are numerous considerations to make when deciding on a scan resolution…

Byron

Ok, I may not be the best PSE user (not even close) but you (all) are missing the fundamental issue – the quality of the original. For example, if you take a magazine photo that’s printed normally anything over 300 dpi scanning is a waste as the original is 300 or less. BUT if that same magazine used roto grauve’ (sp?) then you are looking at scanning at the highest dpi your scanner can manage.

Similarly photographs vary. Ones taken using a high speed film (color or B&W) will be grainier than ones taken with a slow film. I used to be able and get Agfa color film that was ASA 16 and it produced the most beautiful images I’ve ever gotten and grain was non-existent.

So use a magnifier to check out the original or try scanning it at maximum and view that image. Whatever you do remember that high resolution produces much bigger files and unless you have lots of RAM you’ll be waiting for your disk cache a lot. FYI – remember that resolution is linear but the file is X-Y – i.e. a 300 dpi scan of one square inch is 300×300 pixels whereas a 600 dpi scan is 600×600 – four times the number of pixels.

wrote in message

Yes, that is what he said, Les. You’ll develop your own preferences as you

go along and gain experience. It is always better to resample downwards if you have an image file with a resolution that’s too high than to upsample.

Beth & Susan-
Those links you gave me are excellent! Thanks so much. Les

I don’t think you would gain much by going above 600 ppi in scanning a print. Now, scanning from film…that’s different! Go as high as you can go. But I would doubt if you would add much detail above 600 ppi…at least that has been my experience. With most of my old prints, going above 300 has usually been a waste of time and memory.
FWIW…Bert

I too have an old picture made about 1930’s. How can I repair cracks and spotting using PE2.0

The Clone tool is your best friend for repairing cracks. Zoom in and take samples from the areas adjacent to the cracks in order to get the best color match. I usually work with the Align option off, and I take repeated samples. I also play around with the opacity of the brush; sometimes the 100% setting is a little too harsh on these older pictures.

The spots are a different matter. Sometimes the Clone tool will work on those, too, and sometimes it requires a difference technique that smoothes out the appearance of the entire photo. Now I know describing spots is hard, but if you could give us a little better idea of how widespread the problem is it would be helpful. I have some pictures that have small spots that clone out well, and I have other pictures that have larger areas of damage from moisture.

Syble,
do you have a .mac account? You can create a homepage with a .mac acct and iPhoto.

Again it depends on the quality of the print and the original. Old snap shots taken with Kodak Brownies or similar cameras are not very sharp. But take a look at a studio print made from an 4×5 or 120 negative and there won’t been any grain.

Of course we’re all ignoring the printer in this. If your printer can’t print above 600 dpi then image resolution may not be your limiting factor.

wrote in message

I don’t think you would gain much by going above 600 ppi in scanning a

print. Now, scanning from film…that’s different! Go as high as you can go. But I would doubt if you would add much detail above 600 ppi…at least that has been my experience. With most of my old prints, going above 300 has usually been a waste of time and memory.

FWIW…Bert

Since a lot of you are digital camera people or doing photo restoration on old snapshots I think a short (very short) note on film resolution might help. I’ll stick to 35 mm since that was the most popular film for a long time. The information can be adjusted for larger or smaller formats.

Quality lenses are able to resolve parallel black and white lines down to at least 40 per millimeter. That means that there are eighty "pixels" in a millimeter – 40 black and 40 white. This is definitely a floor as most are at 50 lines/mm and above. Standard lenses (i.e. the 50 mm) and the more expensive lenses can go much higher, particularly Leica and Carl Zeiss lenses.

Film, with the exception of very early high speed (ISO 400+) film, can produce images at 40 lines per millimeter.

Now if you take that information along with the 24×36 mm format of the film, mix with the 3.5×5 size of the classis snapshot and you get a print that’s at least 550 "pixels" for resolution. 50 lines/mm would be roughly 685 "pixels". Use of quality lenses and slow film can double and sometimes triple that. So people who use 600 dpi as their upper limit may be just fine for most of their prints.

All of the above can change dramatically with a smaller or larger negative. A 120 film negative (Bronica, Hasselblad) is 60 mm x 60 mm. Which is a minimum of 4800 x 4800 "pixels" although most 120 film cameras have superb lenses and are more likely to be at least 7000 "pixels". Depending on the print size 600 dpi scans may be enough but usually not. A snapshot taken with an old plastic lensed 126 camera would, of course, be much lower and the image would be "soft".

Really old prints are often contact prints meaning the print is the same size as the negative. Those negatives were very often glass 4×5, 5×7, 8×10, or some odd size and the photographer used very slow (translated=high resolution) lenses. Such prints are often called museum quality and will test the scanning limits of any system.

The above applies equally to B&W and color print. Color tranparencies are much more complicated because of the multiple layers, aging (worse than color negatives), "blooming" which refers to the spreading out of a dye and finally the color fringing of lenses. Old slides can get pretty bad but more recent ones will definitely be helped by scanning them with a film scanner rather than a slide adapter on a flat bed scanner.

wrote in message

I’ve been given a photo that was made in 1900, it is 6" x 7 1/2", faded,

and very weathered, it has not been in a frame, so it is covered with wear marks. I’ve repaired a few old photos using PE2, but I consider myself a beginner, and when I scanned this, and saw it on the monitor there was really no good areas to clone etc. It is the entire family of my gg grandparents, and I would love to have it repaired. Is there somewhere that I can send a scanned copy to see if it is repairable?