Another major scanning project

TI
Posted By
Thomas_Ireland
May 2, 2004
Views
398
Replies
10
Status
Closed
Greetings,

Just like PS Rookie (another forum user) who’s in the process of scanning and archiving many photos, I’m working on a similar project in the range of 4K-5K pictures. I, however, am scanning them basically for disaster recovery. I though that before I get too deep into the project, I’d ask you kind folk for your advice.

First, here are my thoughts on the process. I am using my reliable Plustek OpticPro 9636T scanner, which is a parallel port scanner. I ‘ve used this scanner for over 5,000 scans over the years, including 2,000 photos for relative’s disaster recovery CDs. I‘ve tried a USB scanner with similar settings, and didn’t notice much difference in speed. I’m scanning at 300 DPI, and saving to JPG, with filenames of 001, 002, 003… on each CD. The filenames start at 001 each CD. I figure two copies of each CD with one stored off site would about do it. If my process has caused any of you to cringe or worse, I apologize, but let me explain.

As I said, I’m scanning these photos for disaster recovery. Most are 4X6 color prints I have taken over the years with my Nikon FG camera. Many are of flowers in the yard, family member’s pets, weird stuff like that. I have no intention of printing these out. I’m thinking if the originals were destroyed, I’d view the image files on a PC. I have no desire to catalog the files by person, place, time, event, and all that other stuff. I know Adobe Album does a great job of that, and so does the PSCS browser for that matter, but it’s really not for me.

On the other hand, many of the pictures are priceless (at least to me). These include pictures of my parents and other relatives, my wedding, my daughter’s birth. What to do? It doesn’t take any longer to save the image file as a TIFF than it does as a JPG, does it? If not, I guess I should save in TIFF format. What about resolution? I’ve heard that 200-300 DPI is fine for most home printers. Would the considerable extra time required to scan at 600 DPI be worth it? Should I just save the pictures that are most important to me in a higher resolution and as a TIFF? The files would be larger, but the additional CDs required isn’t an issue.

This should be a one-time project as I’ve gone digital over four years ago. I’m now using my second Olympus camera. A C-3020 3.2 MP. I take all my pictures with the digitally (most recently in TIFF format as opposed to JPG!), and simply save them in a folder named with the date they were taken. You see, I know about when I took the Christmas pictures last year. I also know about when we were on vacation three years ago. Sampling a picture in a folder pretty much let’s me know what all the pictures in that folder are about.

So now that you know what I’m trying to accomplish, and for what reason, do any of you have suggestions or comments that could help? Also, I have been considering selling my Nikon FG and all it’s many lens on E-Bay. Is there a reason I shouldn’t? I’m thinking if I haven’t used it in years and am satisfied with its digital replacement, why keep it?

Thanks so much for all you help and suggestions!

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

MM
Mac_McDougald
May 2, 2004
Scan so that you have about 300ppi AT THE LARGEST SIZE you ever expect to output.

So if you ever want your 4×6 to print at 8×12, then 600ppi actual size on your 4×6 would be better.

And sure, TIFF is all around better, expecially not knowing what compression level you are applying to your JPEGs. If you don’t mind the storage space, I see no reason to throw away quality at the outset with JPEG.

Of course, best quality would be scanning the actual negs with film scanner.

Mac
P
photobug
May 2, 2004
Thomas, I’m not sure what you mean when you say ‘this is for disaster recovery’. It sounds to me like you have had ‘wet’ prints made from this film. Do they now exist as digital files somewhere?
TI
Thomas_Ireland
May 2, 2004
Mac,

Being as I haven’t made enlargements in all these years, I can’t imagine I ever will in the future. DPI, PPI? Can you explaing the difference? I’m thinking that 600 ppi is 600 pixels per inch so the 4X6 would be 2400 X 3600, correct? How do I get 600 ppi from my scanner?

Photobug,

I work in an environment where we try hard to safegard our data. We make duplicate files and store them in another facitily so we have them in the event of a fire, eathquake, attack, whatever.

A woman who works with me lost her house and everything in it to a fire years ago. You know what she missed the most? The photos of her children. Insurance covered most of her personal belongings, but certainly not the cherished memories she had in her photo albums.

More and more people are thinking about "disaster recovery", One of the many benefits of digital photography is that pictures are alrady in electronic format, ready to be stored on CD.

Thanks to both of you for you advice.

Any others?
thanks

TomIreland
MM
Mac_McDougald
May 2, 2004
DPI, PPI? Can you explaing the difference?

DPI (dots per inch) is measure of output device rez (like a printer). PPI (pixels per inch) is measure of image resoluton.
The two should generally never coincide except with line drawing type images.
Unfortunately, most scanner interfaces refer to DPI and PPI synonymously.

How do I get 600 ppi from my scanner?

Well, is it capable of 600ppi optical? (it probaby calls it DPI).

Might be time for quick study at Wayne Fulton’s fine: scantips.com

Mac
P
photobug
May 3, 2004
Thomas, I fully understand the ‘what and why’ of disaster recovery; I was trying to determine your specific situation and needs…

Btw, you may want to reconsider safekeeping your images on CDs – there’s good reason to suspect their archival properties! 😉
RK
Ronald_Keller
May 3, 2004
Thomas,

A very important question is finding a reliable storage method. Don’t trust CD’s too much as they degrade in quality over the years.
Even after a few years they can become unreadable…

Greetings from Belgium

Ronald
P
Phosphor
May 3, 2004
Yup.

I wholeheartedly concur with a good long visit to <http://www.scantips.com>
TI
Thomas_Ireland
May 3, 2004
Thanks all,

photobug- The specific needs wouldjust be to view them inthe event of a catastrophe. I hope I never need them, and if I did, probably would not want to print them out.

Ronald- You echoed photobug’s comment about the reliability of CDs. This really concerns me as I have been led (by various sources including the web, IT pros, etc.) that CDs should last 85-125 years if properly cared for. I have temporarily suspended DVD creation work because I have heard they may get flakey after on 18 months! What might the answer be other than a separate hard drive?

Phosphor- Thanks for the scanning site link! The site has way more than enough info. Am considering purchasing the book. I tried to put a link to PS Rookie’s forum post, but it just didn’t work out. The directions listed in the forum say "Copy the location of the message you wish to reference to the clipboard. Just click on the message number (for example, "#14") in the message heading. On the Macintosh, click and hold the mouse down and choose "Copy This Link Location". On Windows, click with the right mouse button and copy the link location to the clipboard." when I try that, I don’t get an appropriate item on the pull-down menu. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

Thanks again to all of you,

Tom Ireland
P
photobug
May 3, 2004
Thomas, your best ‘fallback’ in the event of a disaster are your original film and/or prints (whichever you are scanning). Protect them and store them in the safest possible manner.

I have personally experienced a serious archival problem with CD-R. I first started burning CD-Rs about 9-years ago with a 4x CD-R writer. A couple of years later, I got and started using a 16x CD-R writer, which ultimately malfunctioned, so in 2002 I bought a 48x CD-R writer. Last year, I needed to restore some images I burned onto CD in the 1995 – 1996 time frame. Can you imagine my shock, when I couldn’t read those CDs! I then tried reading them with an older CD-Reader in my wife’s PC… no luck. All of those CD blanks were from reputable brand-name companies (Kodak, Sony and TDK) and the 3 CD-writers I’ve used have also been from reputable manufacturers, Mitsumi and Plextor. Furthermore, my CDs have been stored in cases in a (dark) closet. Thank goodness I still had my original Kodachrome slides (which were still in great condition)!

There was an interesting story a week or so ago about CD longevity in The Independent, a UK publication. Here’s a link that provides an abstract of the article:

< http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story .jsp?story=513486>
LC
Larry CdeBaca
May 5, 2004
HOWEVER…
The fine print on the user agreement when last upgrading Roxio said, in effect, "installing this software may mean that previously recorded CDs could be rendered unreadable by the new software."
I don’t understand why we would ever upgrade, or bother writing archival CDs.
Sounds like I’m just helping pay for the luxuries of company CEOs.

wrote in message
Thomas, your best ‘fallback’ in the event of a disaster are your original
film and/or prints (whichever you are scanning). Protect them and store them in the safest possible manner.
I have personally experienced a serious archival problem with CD-R. I
first started burning CD-Rs about 9-years ago with a 4x CD-R writer. A couple of years later, I got and started using a 16x CD-R writer, which ultimately malfunctioned, so in 2002 I bought a 48x CD-R writer. Last year, I needed to restore some images I burned onto CD in the 1995 – 1996 time frame. Can you imagine my shock, when I couldn’t read those CDs! I then tried reading them with an older CD-Reader in my wife’s PC… no luck. All of those CD blanks were from reputable brand-name companies (Kodak, Sony and TDK) and the 3 CD-writers I’ve used have also been from reputable manufacturers, Mitsumi and Plextor. Furthermore, my CDs have been stored in cases in a (dark) closet. Thank goodness I still had my original Kodachrome slides (which were still in great condition)!
There was an interesting story a week or so ago about CD longevity in The
Independent, a UK publication. Here’s a link that provides an abstract of the article:
< http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story .jsp?story=5134 86>

How to Master Sharpening in Photoshop

Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections