How to clean up scans of books?

M
Posted By
Mike
Nov 5, 2007
Views
1818
Replies
22
Status
Closed
I did a grayscale scan of a few pages from a book. How can I clean up the background so the black text stands out on a clean white background? If anyone can point me in the right direction, your help will be appreciated. Thanks

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.

G
Grinder
Nov 5, 2007
Mike wrote:
I did a grayscale scan of a few pages from a book. How can I clean up the background so the black text stands out on a clean white background? If anyone can point me in the right direction, your help will be appreciated.

From an absolute amateur: A manual levels adjustment can be helpful.
M
Mike
Nov 5, 2007
"Grinder" wrote in message
Mike wrote:
I did a grayscale scan of a few pages from a book. How can I clean up the background so the black text stands out on a clean white background? If anyone can point me in the right direction, your help will be appreciated.

From an absolute amateur: A manual levels adjustment can be helpful.

It took a few tries to figure what it’s doing, but that really works. Thanks!!
A
Auspics
Nov 6, 2007
"Mike" wrote in message
I did a grayscale scan of a few pages from a book. How can I clean up the background so the black text stands out on a clean white background? If anyone can point me in the right direction, your help will be appreciated. Thanks
Books may consist of test (1 bit images) and pictures (halftone or greyscale images). If you scan as a grey scale, you’ll get the pictures with tonal range and pick up unwanted texture from the page too. You can then mask the pictures out and use contrast to produce a black and white rendering of the text.

How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

Douglas
TC
tony cooper
Nov 6, 2007
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:

How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
M
Mike
Nov 6, 2007
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:
How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which
may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.

Besides, I came here for iformation on using Photoshop, not a lecture on copyright.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
J
Joel
Nov 6, 2007
"Mike" wrote:

I did a grayscale scan of a few pages from a book. How can I clean up the background so the black text stands out on a clean white background? If anyone can point me in the right direction, your help will be appreciated. Thanks

1. Try to scan at lower DPI. Some scanner program has different scanning option for something like "photo", "newspaper", "magazine" etc.. and usually
Newspaper set somwehere around 95-115 DPI or so for better result (or sometime more doesn’t always mean better).

2. Cleaning up, you can use LEVEL. And if you want more (usually don’t) then you can use something like "Color Range", "Dodge/Burn" may be more but I don’t remember at the moment.
D
Douglas
Nov 6, 2007
"Mike" wrote in message
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:
How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which
may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.

Besides, I came here for iformation on using Photoshop, not a lecture on copyright.

Thank you too …for once again demonstrating the uselessness of offering help to the helpless.

Douglas
TC
tony cooper
Nov 6, 2007
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:00:36 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:
How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which
may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.

Besides, I came here for iformation on using Photoshop, not a lecture on copyright.

When you post in a public forum you get the replies that readers of the thread decide to post. No replies are owed to you, and you don’t have control of what is in the replies. It’s a newsgroup, not a Help Desk. Anything you get is offered as a favor to you.

Whether or not Douglas’s comment, or my comment, was of interest to you is immaterial. Someone else may benefit if you don’t. Frankly, I don’t care if you benefit or not.

If you don’t like the replies you get, Google up your own answers.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
M
Mike
Nov 7, 2007
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:00:36 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:
How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which
may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.

Besides, I came here for iformation on using Photoshop, not a lecture on copyright.

When you post in a public forum you get the replies that readers of the thread decide to post. No replies are owed to you, and you don’t have control of what is in the replies. It’s a newsgroup, not a Help Desk. Anything you get is offered as a favor to you.

Whether or not Douglas’s comment, or my comment, was of interest to you is immaterial. Someone else may benefit if you don’t. Frankly, I don’t care if you benefit or not.

If you don’t like the replies you get, Google up your own answers.

I already got the reply I needed from a useful poster who, even thought an armature, was concise, straightforward and what I needed.

I did not come here for your emotional baggage and the discussion you are providing is of no use to me. It was not what I asked for nor even useful. Why should I be appreciative? Nothing of use was provided.

Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am appreciative when it is warranted.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
M
Mike
Nov 7, 2007
And besides…. What if God decided to copy protect everything he created?
NE
nesredep egrob
Nov 8, 2007
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:00:36 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:
How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which
may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.

Besides, I came here for iformation on using Photoshop, not a lecture on copyright.

When you post in a public forum you get the replies that readers of the thread decide to post. No replies are owed to you, and you don’t have control of what is in the replies. It’s a newsgroup, not a Help Desk. Anything you get is offered as a favor to you.

Whether or not Douglas’s comment, or my comment, was of interest to you is immaterial. Someone else may benefit if you don’t. Frankly, I don’t care if you benefit or not.

If you don’t like the replies you get, Google up your own answers.

I already got the reply I needed from a useful poster who, even thought an armature, was concise, straightforward and what I needed.

I did not come here for your emotional baggage and the discussion you are providing is of no use to me. It was not what I asked for nor even useful. Why should I be appreciative? Nothing of use was provided.

Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just ‘Mike’, it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

Borge in sunny Perth, Australia
TC
twisty creek
Nov 8, 2007
"nesredep egrob" <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote in message
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:00:36 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:34:00 GMT, "Douglas" wrote:
How you handle images is another thing entirely. Copyright needs to be considered whenever a book is scanned. Double so when images are in it which
may belong to someone other than the copyright owner of the text in a book.

It is perfectly legal to scan pages from a book. The fact that the text and images are copyrighted is irrelevant. Copyright comes into play with the *use* of the scans. As long as the scans are for personal use and not distributed there’s no problem.

Besides, I came here for iformation on using Photoshop, not a lecture on copyright.

When you post in a public forum you get the replies that readers of the thread decide to post. No replies are owed to you, and you don’t have control of what is in the replies. It’s a newsgroup, not a Help Desk. Anything you get is offered as a favor to you.

Whether or not Douglas’s comment, or my comment, was of interest to you is immaterial. Someone else may benefit if you don’t. Frankly, I don’t care if you benefit or not.

If you don’t like the replies you get, Google up your own answers.

I already got the reply I needed from a useful poster who, even thought an armature, was concise, straightforward and what I needed.

I did not come here for your emotional baggage and the discussion you are providing is of no use to me. It was not what I asked for nor even useful. Why should I be appreciative? Nothing of use was provided.

Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just ‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I know what you mean. I try to control it, but thats unfortunately just my personality. Many don’t like it. I just like being that way when I come to a new group. I can’t explain why. If I suck around here for a while (which I probably won’t), things would change as we got to know each other more.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

Borge in sunny Perth, Australia
J
Joel
Nov 8, 2007
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just ‘Mike’, it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything can stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.
D
Dave
Nov 8, 2007
"twisty creek" wrote:
. If I suck around here for a while (which I
probably won’t), things would change as we got to know each other more.

Sorry if this question is inappropriate, but English is not my home language.
If you do suck around here for a while, can we say you
suck or you are a sucker or something like so?

Dave
J
jaSPAMc
Nov 8, 2007
Dave found these unused words:

"twisty creek" wrote:
. If I suck around here for a while (which I
probably won’t), things would change as we got to know each other more.

Sorry if this question is inappropriate, but English is not my home language.
If you do suck around here for a while, can we say you
suck or you are a sucker or something like so?

Dave

After the ‘outbursts’, he’ll have to suck up to get much more help …
TC
twisty creek
Nov 9, 2007
"Joel" wrote in message
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am
appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just ‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything can stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block my ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with a troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention, you can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.
TC
tony cooper
Nov 9, 2007
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:12:51 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

"Joel" wrote in message
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am
appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just ‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything can stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block my ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with a troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention, you can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.
Please…the word is "exacerbate", not "exasperate". People get exasperated, situations are exacerbated.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
TC
twisty creek
Nov 9, 2007
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:12:51 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"Joel" wrote in message
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I am
appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just ‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything can
stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block my
ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with a
troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention, you
can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.
Please…the word is "exacerbate", not "exasperate". People get exasperated, situations are exacerbated.

I see that a little of both can happen. Certainly you understand what I mean…..




Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
TC
twisty creek
Nov 9, 2007
"Mike" wrote in message
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:12:51 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"Joel" wrote in message
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I
am
appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just
‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to
do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything can
stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block my
ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with a
troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention, you
can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.
Please…the word is "exacerbate", not "exasperate". People get exasperated, situations are exacerbated.

I see that a little of both can happen. Certainly you understand what I mean…..

Besides, everyone makes spelling mistakes and gramatical errors. When you become more accepting of someone, such things become less noticable.




Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

TC
tony cooper
Nov 9, 2007
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 05:01:03 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

"Mike" wrote in message
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:12:51 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"Joel" wrote in message
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response? I
am
appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just
‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to
do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything can
stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block my
ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with a
troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention, you
can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.
Please…the word is "exacerbate", not "exasperate". People get exasperated, situations are exacerbated.

I see that a little of both can happen. Certainly you understand what I mean…..

Besides, everyone makes spelling mistakes and gramatical errors.

You’ve managed to add a spelling mistake in this post.



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
TC
twisty creek
Nov 9, 2007
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 05:01:03 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"Mike" wrote in message
"tony cooper" wrote in message
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:12:51 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
"Joel" wrote in message
nesredep egrob <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:54:28 GMT, "Mike" wrote:
<snip>
Did you not notice that I thanked the first poster for his response?
I
am
appreciative when it is warranted.
Mike I was going to blacklist you – you are a bit if a twit but as just
‘Mike’,
it would be a shame for everyone else just calling themselves ‘Mike’

I don’t follow this threat *but* if you just wish to do what you wish to
do, then just by looking at the header you QUOTED I don’t see anything
can
stop you to do what you wish to do.

And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use
either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking
can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block
my
ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with
a
troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention,
you
can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.
Please…the word is "exacerbate", not "exasperate". People get exasperated, situations are exacerbated.

I see that a little of both can happen. Certainly you understand what I mean…..

Besides, everyone makes spelling mistakes and gramatical errors.

You’ve managed to add a spelling mistake in this post.

Spelling is not my cup of tea….



Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
J
Joel
Nov 9, 2007
"Mike" wrote:

<snip>
And your Agent v1.x is capable of doing it. So you can Ctrl-K then use either one

– {}

– or {}

– or {@ald.com} or {ald.com}

– or ({} | {@ald.com} | {ald.com})

And it won’t mistaken with other Mike’s.

Only weaklings need to block when they can’t handle it. None of those methods are effective since one can easily change their profile. Blocking can sometimes have undesirable side effects too. You would need to block my ip address, and there are ways around that too. The best way to deal with a troublesome poster is to just ignore them. If you give extra attention, you can often exasperate the situation. That’s just my few words of wisdom. Trust me, my advice works.

I know and sure can trust you (cuz that is an oldest trick), but you may want to trust me that with some available tool people can tweak 99.x% of you "Mike" to its root.

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections