Moire Pattern

does your scanning software have a ‘descreen’ function? if so, try it out, might help
otherwise try photoshop or a descreen plugin filter – paint shop pro has one for moire pattern removal, could help too

"Hari" wrote in message

Dear Newsgroup,

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures

that

have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by

the

official photographer have a sort of moir

Scanning professionally "CREATED" images is illegal. Why?…..
There is a large range of value given across the spectrum of photographic abilities.
Each photographer will charge somewhere between what the market will bear and
the desire a client has for their particular service. The person who chooses to make
a living photographing other people relies on the sales of such images. Without sales
he will not provide an income that his family depends. Knowing that cheaters exist
who will try to infringe on the copyright is an unsettling thought for most photographers
who have worked hard to provide a good service to their clients. And yet, there is little
a photographer can do, except trust that those cheaters go somewhere else. Perhaps
an employee of HP can come and shoot your wedding. Maybe Epson, or CVS or Walgreens have employees who work behind the counter by day and photograph your
family by night. But I doubt that the quality would be as good as if it were done by a
full time professional photographer (in most cases). So why not give the poor schmuck
the business. After all your local photographer is not out trying to steal your income or
take your job away from you. But that is exactly what you are doing to him. But so far I’ve
only mentioned the humanitarian reasons for not stealing "created" images. Let’s also
mention it is (in the United States) an illegal act to copy, for any reason, a professionally
created image. Why do you think it’s illegal. Do you also believe our government is wrong?
Why would they spend time to create a bill and pass a law if it was insignificant?
Now you may have some form of rebuttal to give. Please keep in mind whomever reads
these threads,,,,,,it’s an opinion of anyone low enough to commit such an act in the first place.
John M.

jwm2 wrote:

Let’s also mention it is (in the United States) an illegal

act to copy, for any reason, a

professionally created image.

No it isn’t.

—
Ben Cooper

"jwm2" wrote in message

Scanning professionally "CREATED" images is illegal. Why?…..
There is a large range of value given across the spectrum of photographic abilities.
Each photographer will charge somewhere between what the market will bear and
the desire a client has for their particular service. The person who

chooses

to make
a living photographing other people relies on the sales of such images. Without sales
he will not provide an income that his family depends. Knowing that cheaters exist
who will try to infringe on the copyright is an unsettling thought for

most

photographers
who have worked hard to provide a good service to their clients. And yet, there is little
a photographer can do, except trust that those cheaters go somewhere else. Perhaps
an employee of HP can come and shoot your wedding. Maybe Epson, or CVS or Walgreens have employees who work behind the counter by day and photograph your
family by night. But I doubt that the quality would be as good as if it

were

done by a
full time professional photographer (in most cases). So why not give the poor schmuck
the business. After all your local photographer is not out trying to

steal

your income or
take your job away from you. But that is exactly what you are doing to

him.

But so far I’ve
only mentioned the humanitarian reasons for not stealing "created" images. Let’s also
mention it is (in the United States) an illegal act to copy, for any

reason,

a professionally
created image. Why do you think it’s illegal. Do you also believe our government is wrong?
Why would they spend time to create a bill and pass a law if it was insignificant?
Now you may have some form of rebuttal to give. Please keep in mind whomever reads
these threads,,,,,,it’s an opinion of anyone low enough to commit such an act in the first place.
John M.

Wow! If Hari comes back with a rebuttal (and I sure hope he does, though beyond the entertainment value it seems pointless) will you still respond when you sober up?

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:01:47 -0500, "jwm2" scribbled:

Scanning professionally "CREATED" images is illegal.

No it isn’t. Of course if you’d like to cite the specific law that state that scanning an image is illegal I’ll gladly admit I was wrong..

Each photographer will charge somewhere between what the market will bear and
the desire a client has for their particular service. The person who chooses to make

And do something about your fucking wordwrap.

Hari,
I’ve got a Umax flatbed that’s as old as the hills yet the driver software has a moire filter. Have you checked for an updated driver for yours? It’s been my experience that HP will probably charge you for one, so try www.driverguide.com. Membership is free. If that doesn’t do it and no one else suggests a solution you might try a search for a company called Eye Fidelity Tools (?) which had a correction filter for such things (if they’re still in business).

"Hari" wrote in message

Dear Newsgroup,

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures

that

have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by

the

official photographer have a sort of moir

It’s highly unlikely this is a security feature. It is high likely your scanner is picking up the ‘screen’ patern of satin paper. Try putting the photo on the glass at an angle and see if this helps. Otherwise your only alternative is to get a someone with a better scanner to do them for you. "Hari" wrote in message

Dear Newsgroup,

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures

that

have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by

the

official photographer have a sort of moir

Voivod wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:01:47 -0500, "jwm2" scribbled:

Each photographer will charge somewhere between what the market will bear and
the desire a client has for their particular service. The person who chooses to make

And do something about your fucking wordwrap.

He probably does it on purpose to annoy us as much as the content of his babblings. Once a jerk always a jerk.

JP

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 09:43:28 -0500, "jwm2" scribbled:

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#102

You might want to check out sections § 107 and § 113.

If the "professional" Photographers you so vehemently defend adopted a reasonable standard of ethics in the first place… These situations would not exist. As far as a wedding is concerned; The singular purpose of paying someone to record the event is for your own enjoyment… Not the Photographers profits!

I go along with the retaining of copyright on images which can be sold many times over (wall art and so called ‘fine art’) or images sold to poster printers and ones published in magazines …but you could hardly call it ethical to get paid a few grand for a few hours work photographing Mr and Mrs average’s wedding and then blackmail the client into paying exorbitant fees for re-prints just because YOUR ethics say its intellectual property. Try pulling that stunt on magazine publishers and see how far you get.

I make a living as a Photographer. I don’t lower myself to the level of photographers who get paid plenty for what they do yet want more – much more.
Doug
———–

"jwm2" wrote in message

Scanning professionally "CREATED" images is illegal.

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures that have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by the official photographer have a sort of moiré pattern over them.

You didn’t mention what approaches you’ve already tried, you might try searching with google for something like "remove moire pattern photoshop". I found these, some of them might work for you.

http://graphicssoft.about.com/cs/photoshop/ht/apsremovemoire .htm

http://desktoppub.about.com/cs/moire/

http://answers.google.com/answers/main?cmd=threadview&id =224671

Quoting from the 1st page

1. Scan the image at a resolution approximately 150-200% higher than what you need for final output.
2. Go to Filter > Noise > Median.
3. Use a radius between 1-3. Typically the higher the quality of the source, the lower the radius can be. Use your own judgement, but you will probably find that 3 works well for newspapers, 2 for magazines, and 1 for books.
4. Go to Image > Image Size (Image > Resize > Image Size in Elements) and resample to the desired image size and resolution using the bicubic resampling option.
5. Make sure you are zoomed to 100% magnification.
6. Go to Filter > Sharpen > Unsharp Mask.
7. Exact settings will depend on the image resolution, but these settings are a good starting point: Amount 50-100%, Radius 1-3 pixels, Threshold 1-5. Use your eye as the final judge.

Tips:

1. If you still see a pattern after applying the Median filter, try a slight gaussian blur before resampling. Apply just enough blur to reduce the pattern.
2. If you notice halos or glows in the image after using Unsharp Mask, go to Edit > Fade. Use settings: 50% Opacity, Mode Luminosity. (Not available in Elements.)

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures that
have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by the
official photographer have a sort of moiré pattern over them.

http://www.graphic-design.com/Photoshop/Tips/moire.html

I’m thinking that you might scan your photos, remove any moire that’s on them, then add any effects you want yourself.

Dear Group,

Thank you all who made helpful suggestions. I haven’t had time to try them yet, but I feel confident of success when I do.
Happy New Year.
Hari
"steph" wrote in message

does your scanning software have a ‘descreen’ function? if so, try it out, might help
otherwise try photoshop or a descreen plugin filter – paint shop pro has

one

for moire pattern removal, could help too

"Hari" wrote in message

Dear Newsgroup,

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures

that

have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by

the

official photographer have a sort of moir

The best way to beat moire’ is to rotate the image on the scanner bed several degrees off
allignment. Then also try several different resolutions which would scan at non-compatable
allignment. If after about five or six trys it still exists try using a digital camera instead of scanner.
If you have access to polarized screen, use vertical on light and horizontal across lens.
John M
PS I’m not so bad, just advocating what I feel is the right thing.

The only thing to think of is:
why ask a professionnal to take the photos if you can’t afford this (even if you can afford the Maldives).
ask before for the prices of re-order or ask a friend (free).

Techno Aussie wrote:

If the "professional" Photographers you so vehemently defend adopted a reasonable standard of ethics in the first place… These situations would not exist. As far as a wedding is concerned; The singular purpose of paying someone to record the event is for your own enjoyment… Not the Photographers profits!

I go along with the retaining of copyright on images which can be sold many times over (wall art and so called ‘fine art’) or images sold to poster printers and ones published in magazines …but you could hardly call it ethical to get paid a few grand for a few hours work photographing Mr and Mrs average’s wedding and then blackmail the client into paying exorbitant fees for re-prints just because YOUR ethics say its intellectual property. Try pulling that stunt on magazine publishers and see how far you get.

I make a living as a Photographer. I don’t lower myself to the level of photographers who get paid plenty for what they do yet want more – much more.
Doug
———–

"jwm2" wrote in message

Scanning professionally "CREATED" images is illegal.

…. or put in the contract that YOU get the rights and negatives! If they won’t … choose another service.

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:17:40 +0100, "Marsupilami" found these unused words floating about:

The only thing to think of is:
why ask a professionnal to take the photos if you can’t afford this (even if you can afford the Maldives).
ask before for the prices of re-order or ask a friend (free).
Techno Aussie wrote:

If the "professional" Photographers you so vehemently defend adopted a reasonable standard of ethics in the first place… These situations would not exist. As far as a wedding is concerned; The singular purpose of paying someone to record the event is for your own enjoyment… Not the Photographers profits!

I go along with the retaining of copyright on images which can be sold many times over (wall art and so called ‘fine art’) or images sold to poster printers and ones published in magazines …but you could hardly call it ethical to get paid a few grand for a few hours work photographing Mr and Mrs average’s wedding and then blackmail the client into paying exorbitant fees for re-prints just because YOUR ethics say its intellectual property. Try pulling that stunt on magazine publishers and see how far you get.

I make a living as a Photographer. I don’t lower myself to the level of photographers who get paid plenty for what they do yet want more – much more.
Doug
———–

"jwm2" wrote in message

Scanning professionally "CREATED" images is illegal.

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 20:39:57 -0000, "Hari" wrote:

Dear Newsgroup,

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures that have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by the official photographer have a sort of moiré pattern over them. I can’t believe that this is a ploy by the photographer to ensure that I reorder from him. If it is, I’d like to know how he did it.

I’m not sure how they do it either, but they do it. My son had a picture that was heavily damaged, so he gave me the contact sheet he originally got from the photographer and every single thumbnail had ‘moire’ in the picture. Scanning in descreen mode didn’t remove all of it, especially as I scanned it at the highest resolution, but a few hours in photoshop made it at least acceptable.

As they were taken in the Maldives, I don’t think he’s holding his breath waiting for repeat orders.

What am I doing wrong? I’ve tried different resolutions, but that doesn’t help. I’ve even tried scanning small sections at a time and stitching them together. Needless to say, that doesn’t help either.

The finish on the prints is a satin finish. My scanner is an old HP5470c that has always done sterling work and delivered the goods in the past.

Any help will be appreciated.

Take Care,

Hari

I don’t work for them or have any interest in the company but… Take a look at www.neatimage.com I don’t know how they do what they do, but I have gotten some amazing results. See if it helps.

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 07:29:58 -0500, E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 20:39:57 -0000, "Hari" wrote:

Dear Newsgroup,

I’m having problems scanning some of my wedding pictures. The pictures that have been taken by my friends and family are fine, but the ones taken by the official photographer have a sort of moiré pattern over them. I can’t believe that this is a ploy by the photographer to ensure that I reorder from him. If it is, I’d like to know how he did it.

I’m not sure how they do it either, but they do it. My son had a picture that was heavily damaged, so he gave me the contact sheet he originally got from the photographer and every single thumbnail had ‘moire’ in the picture. Scanning in descreen mode didn’t remove all of it, especially as I scanned it at the highest resolution, but a few hours in photoshop made it at least acceptable.

As they were taken in the Maldives, I don’t think he’s holding his breath waiting for repeat orders.

What am I doing wrong? I’ve tried different resolutions, but that doesn’t help. I’ve even tried scanning small sections at a time and stitching them together. Needless to say, that doesn’t help either.

The finish on the prints is a satin finish. My scanner is an old HP5470c that has always done sterling work and delivered the goods in the past.

Any help will be appreciated.

Take Care,

Hari