Photo Scanning

"Komboloi" wrote in message

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them.

You are trying to be funny, right? Scanning negatives in order to "preserve" them? Film is your best storage!

OK how do you store the film so it does not erode? What, sotre it in a refreigerator? I figured digitizing will have greater longevity in the course of time. 🙂
"jjs" wrote in message

"Komboloi" wrote in message

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them.

You are trying to be funny, right? Scanning negatives in order to

"preserve"

them? Film is your best storage!

Komboloi wrote:

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them. Or to photograph with my 4 megapixel Sony.
Tools: Adobe CS [aka Photoshop 8] and HP Scanjet 7400c in XP Pro

When I scan some photos that have more dark fields than others, the problem is intensely amplified. For example, there are these micro-organisms that feed off the paper which in turn puts a dent into the photo. Ordinarily I use the close tool to fix this problem. But what I am wondering is if there are other ways to obviate this problem before I even transfer it into the Adobe workspace from the scanner. I can provide a sample photo to illustrate the problem in JPG form for those who give me an answer. Thanks in advance! AJ

Get a film scanner and scan the negatives again. Scratch and dust removing functions are available in modern devices (->Google).

Scanning Photos (=paper prints) will not give the quality a good film scanner allows for.

Do not use a flatbed scanner with negative option.

Michael

"Komboloi" wrote in message

OK how do you store the film so it does not erode? What, sotre it in a refreigerator? I figured digitizing will have greater longevity in the course of time. 🙂

It makes no sense to scan all your negatives today. Look at it this way: properly processed film will last 100 years or more. Scanning technology is becoming steadily less expensive. When you really do want to digitize a negative in the future it will be less expensive, and possibly better quality to do it then, not now.

OK, you’re saying forget about using the HP 7400c’s negative functionality and go out and buy a negative film scanner?
What am I looking for a setback? Also, I have 35MM film, what about AVS which is inaccessible and I suppose better preserved than 35MM? How do you scan that?
AJ
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them. Or to photograph with my 4 megapixel Sony.
Tools: Adobe CS [aka Photoshop 8] and HP Scanjet 7400c in XP Pro

When I scan some photos that have more dark fields than others, the problem is intensely amplified. For example, there are these micro-organisms that feed off the paper which in turn puts a dent into the photo. Ordinarily I use the close tool to fix this problem. But what I am wondering is if there are other ways to obviate this problem before I even transfer it into the Adobe workspace from the scanner. I can provide a sample photo to illustrate the problem in JPG form for those who give me an answer. Thanks in advance! AJ

Get a film scanner and scan the negatives again. Scratch and dust removing functions are available in modern devices (->Google).
Scanning Photos (=paper prints) will not give the quality a good film scanner allows for.

Do not use a flatbed scanner with negative option.

Michael

I figured digitizing will have greater longevity in the
course of time. 🙂

Many people figure that. The problem is, digital files have to be stored on something–and storage media changes so fast it’s possible to end up with a huge stack of files on some media that you have no way to read.

People always say h, I can copy the files to new media when I get it," but people rarely actually *do* the work when it comes right down to it.

Add tothat that any kind of storage device you can put the images on, save for magneto-optical (MO) disks, will not last as long as the negative lasts…

A properly fixed and stored negative will last about a century. A black and white gelatin silver photographic print will easily last for well over a century. What’re you going to put your file on that will last that long?

—
Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Well, I have two HDD on my machine. One for my OS and partitioned so that E: is where I install my programs and C: for my OS with D: for another possible OS or to take space from in the event C: necessitates it so. My other HDD is huge and can accommodate all my media. I am not a professoinal so it’s not like it’s my likelihood at the moment. What with dual layer burners and media coming out I could probably store my data on one of these DVDs and then store it @ the safety deposit box I have. That will cover it just fine.
Another thing, this scanner has a device called XPA and man it does wonders! Today was the first time I had a chance to use it and it scans negatives & slides just beautifully!
Another question I want to ask is this.
What is the optimal resolution I should use?
Also, is it a rule of thumb that the larger the resolution the bigger the enlargement I can make?
For instance, say I want to make a 20"x30" poster what size should the scanned negative/slide be? Thanks for your insights!
AJ

"Tacit" wrote in message

I figured digitizing will have greater longevity in the
course of time. 🙂

Many people figure that. The problem is, digital files have to be stored

on

something–and storage media changes so fast it’s possible to end up with

a

huge stack of files on some media that you have no way to read.
People always say h, I can copy the files to new media when I get it," but people rarely actually *do* the work when it comes right down to it.
Add tothat that any kind of storage device you can put the images on, save

for

magneto-optical (MO) disks, will not last as long as the negative lasts…
A properly fixed and stored negative will last about a century. A black

and

white gelatin silver photographic print will easily last for well over a century. What’re you going to put your file on that will last that long?
—
Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Another question I want to ask is this.
What is the optimal resolution I should use?
Also, is it a rule of thumb that the larger the resolution the bigger the enlargement I can make?

The best way to handle this is to tell the scanner what size and what resolution you want the scan to be. If you are scanning an image, and you want the final output to be (for example) 8 by 10 inches, you tell your scanner software "Make the scan 8 by 10 inches at 300 pixels per inch" and you’ll get an image that’s 8 by 10 images at 300 pixels per inch, regardless of the physical size of the object being scanned.

In most cases, for inkjet reproduction or for press reproduction with a 150-line halftone, the image should be 300 pixels per inch at the final output size; more resolution is wasted. In general, though, yes–the higher the resolution of the scan, the more you can enlarge the scan at output.

—
Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Komboloi wrote:

OK, you’re saying forget about using the HP 7400c’s negative functionality and go out and buy a negative film scanner? What am I looking for a setback? Also, I have 35MM film, what about AVS which is inaccessible and I suppose better preserved than 35MM? How do you scan that?

If you need your negatives scanned, get them in the best available quality and that means a scanner dedicated to film.

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

What is AVS? Age verification system?

Michael

AJ
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them. Or to photograph with my 4 megapixel Sony.
Tools: Adobe CS [aka Photoshop 8] and HP Scanjet 7400c in XP Pro

When I scan some photos that have more dark fields than others, the problem is intensely amplified. For example, there are these micro-organisms that feed off the paper which in turn puts a dent into the photo. Ordinarily I use the close tool to fix this problem. But what I am wondering is if there are other ways to obviate this problem before I even transfer it into the Adobe workspace from the scanner. I can provide a sample photo to illustrate the problem in JPG form for those who give me an answer. Thanks in advance! AJ

Get a film scanner and scan the negatives again. Scratch and dust removing functions are available in modern devices (->Google).
Scanning Photos (=paper prints) will not give the quality a good film scanner allows for.

Do not use a flatbed scanner with negative option.

Michael

OK are you messing with me on AVS? I use that film only because the camera I use has panoramic capability and it is a Contax with Carl Zeiss lens. I’ll need to find out how to digitize that film too now. "Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

OK, you’re saying forget about using the HP 7400c’s negative functionality and go out and buy a negative film scanner? What am I looking for a setback? Also, I have 35MM film, what about AVS which is inaccessible and I suppose better preserved than 35MM? How do you scan that?

If you need your negatives scanned, get them in the best available quality and that means a scanner dedicated to film.

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

What is AVS? Age verification system?

Michael

AJ
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them. Or to photograph with my 4 megapixel Sony.
Tools: Adobe CS [aka Photoshop 8] and HP Scanjet 7400c in XP Pro

When I scan some photos that have more dark fields than others, the problem is intensely amplified. For example, there are these micro-organisms that feed off the paper which in turn puts a dent into the photo. Ordinarily I use the close tool to fix this problem. But what I am wondering is if there are other ways to obviate this problem before I even transfer it into the Adobe workspace from the scanner. I can provide a sample photo to illustrate the problem in JPG form for those who give me an answer. Thanks in advance! AJ

Get a film scanner and scan the negatives again. Scratch and dust removing functions are available in modern devices (->Google).
Scanning Photos (=paper prints) will not give the quality a good film scanner allows for.

Do not use a flatbed scanner with negative option.

Michael

P.S.
How do I find this density range you’re tlaking about in my Preferences? Where is this listed? Does it have to do with the control ranges? 8, 10, 12, 16 bit readout?
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

OK, you’re saying forget about using the HP 7400c’s negative functionality and go out and buy a negative film scanner? What am I looking for a setback? Also, I have 35MM film, what about AVS which is inaccessible and I suppose better preserved than 35MM? How do you scan that?

If you need your negatives scanned, get them in the best available quality and that means a scanner dedicated to film.

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

What is AVS? Age verification system?

Michael

AJ
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them. Or to photograph with my 4 megapixel Sony.
Tools: Adobe CS [aka Photoshop 8] and HP Scanjet 7400c in XP Pro

When I scan some photos that have more dark fields than others, the problem is intensely amplified. For example, there are these micro-organisms that feed off the paper which in turn puts a dent into the photo. Ordinarily I use the close tool to fix this problem. But what I am wondering is if there are other ways to obviate this problem before I even transfer it into the Adobe workspace from the scanner. I can provide a sample photo to illustrate the problem in JPG form for those who give me an answer. Thanks in advance! AJ

Get a film scanner and scan the negatives again. Scratch and dust removing functions are available in modern devices (->Google).
Scanning Photos (=paper prints) will not give the quality a good film scanner allows for.

Do not use a flatbed scanner with negative option.

Michael

How do I find this density range you’re tlaking about in my Preferences?

It’s not about your Preferences. it is a measure of a scanner’s ability to record a wide density range, from light to dark. Scanners with a low density range produce scans that are blown out in the hilights and muddy and dark, with no detail, in the shadows.

Many people mistakenly believe the best way to tell a scanner’s quality is the scanner’s resolution, so manufacturers hype the resulution, often unethically. But a scanner’s resolution is nowhere near as important to the quality of the scans as the scanner’s dynamic range.

It’s trivial for a manufacturer to make a scanner have a high resolution. Making a scanner have a high dynamic range is more difficult and expensive. So scanner makers hype the resolution, but often keep quiet about dynamic range–which in most consumer scanners is very poor.

—
Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

"Xalinai" wrote:
….

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

….

You sure? Read:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/epson-4870pho to_2.html

I own this scanner and given the fact that it can process up to 24 negatives, eight slides and even two of my 4×5" bw negatives at a time, it is a real bargain.

Peter

I have a little history about my HP 7400c. I used to own the 4200c if memory serves me correctly which I had sent back to XP for reason that the software HP had released to work with XP was a total failure.
So, they bumped up to this their latest and their greatest scanner. This happened last year late 2003.
Now I find out about this digital ice which I was not aware. Well, coming into these newsgroups is always an education! Thanks!
I am curious now to look up and see what this density range is for my scanner, if it has one to begin with.
Although, judging from the price range my HP is far more expensive than the EPSON. So you have to wonder now, even though everything is made in China, which company is pumping out the quality. EPSON?
I thought they made printers 🙂
"Peter Wollenberg" wrote in message

"Xalinai" wrote:
…

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

…

You sure? Read:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/epson-4870pho to_2.html
I own this scanner and given the fact that it can process up to 24 negatives, eight slides and even two of my 4×5" bw negatives at a time, it is a real bargain.

Peter

Sorry I used to have the 6200c.
"Komboloi" wrote in message news:…

I have a little history about my HP 7400c. I used to own the 4200c if

memory

serves me correctly which I had sent back to XP for reason that the

software

HP had released to work with XP was a total failure.
So, they bumped up to this their latest and their greatest scanner. This happened last year late 2003.
Now I find out about this digital ice which I was not aware. Well, coming into these newsgroups is always an education! Thanks!
I am curious now to look up and see what this density range is for my scanner, if it has one to begin with.
Although, judging from the price range my HP is far more expensive than

the

EPSON. So you have to wonder now, even though everything is made in China, which company is pumping out the quality. EPSON?
I thought they made printers 🙂
"Peter Wollenberg" wrote in message

"Xalinai" wrote:
…

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

…

You sure? Read:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/epson-4870pho to_2.html
I own this scanner and given the fact that it can process up to 24 negatives, eight slides and even two of my 4×5" bw negatives at a time, it is a real bargain.

Peter

Peter Wollenberg wrote:

"Xalinai" wrote:
…

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

…

You sure? Read:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/epson-4870pho to_2.html
I own this scanner and given the fact that it can process up to 24 negatives, eight slides and even two of my 4×5" bw negatives at a time, it is a real bargain.

Those are the manufacturer’s specifications.

The 4870 is one of the best of its kind and the density range is exceptional for a flatbe device.

The effective resolution in a recent test was only 1650ppi but regarding dmax(3.9) and density range (3.2) it can compete with average film scanners (that’s why it was tested with them).

Effective resolution for the better ones among the tested film scanners (Nikon, Minolta Scan Elite 5400, Microtek 120tf) was in the 3000 to 5400 ppi with similar density ranges as the Epson and dmax values of up to 4.8

So again: If a subject is available on paper and on the negative, scan the negative. If it is in any way possible, use a good film scanner for scanning the negatives, even exceptional flatbed devices can barely compete.

Michael

Peter

This has been an education and thank you. I am actually evaluating selling my HP 7400 and buying this Epson. One thing I wonder is if this scanner has a SCSI interface. My HP came with a SCSI interface which I will not sell anyway when the time comes. SCSI is better than USB as far as I am concerned! USB is too flaky and temperamental!
Need to see if I can get something decent for this scanner which has been replaced by the 8000 series. "Discontinued" they call it now! YUCH I hate technology and the way it changes so fast. Anyway!
AJ
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Peter Wollenberg wrote:

"Xalinai" wrote:
…

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

…

You sure? Read:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/epson-4870pho to_2.html
I own this scanner and given the fact that it can process up to 24 negatives, eight slides and even two of my 4×5" bw negatives at a time, it is a real bargain.

Those are the manufacturer’s specifications.

The 4870 is one of the best of its kind and the density range is exceptional for a flatbe device.

The effective resolution in a recent test was only 1650ppi but regarding dmax(3.9) and density range (3.2) it can compete with average film scanners (that’s why it was tested with them).

Effective resolution for the better ones among the tested film scanners (Nikon, Minolta Scan Elite 5400, Microtek 120tf) was in the 3000 to 5400 ppi with similar density ranges as the Epson and dmax values of up to 4.8

So again: If a subject is available on paper and on the negative, scan the negative. If it is in any way possible, use a good film scanner for scanning the negatives, even exceptional flatbed devices can barely compete.

Michael

Peter

I’ve heard of the Plustek OpticFilm 7200 which is a new dedicated film scanner which scans at 7200dpi (true optical). Has anyone used it for 35mm neg scanning? http://tinyurl.com/4a3h2

Chris Street

If you need your negatives scanned, get them in the best available quality and that means a scanner dedicated to film.

"Komboloi" …

P.S.
How do I find this density range you’re tlaking about in my Preferences? Where is this listed? Does it have to do with the control ranges? 8, 10, 12, 16 bit readout?
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

OK, you’re saying forget about using the HP 7400c’s negative functionality and go out and buy a negative film scanner? What am I looking for a setback? Also, I have 35MM film, what about AVS which is inaccessible and I suppose better preserved than 35MM? How do you scan that?

If you need your negatives scanned, get them in the best available quality and that means a scanner dedicated to film.

Density is one keyword to look for, both the density range (dynamic range) and the maximum density (dmax) that can be read with a film scanner is far beyond the limits of flatbed devices. Best dmax result for a flatbed device in a recent test was 2.2 while good film scanners go to 3.8 or even beyond 4 (on a logarithmic scale).

What is AVS? Age verification system?

Michael

AJ
"Xalinai" wrote in message

Komboloi wrote:

Problem: Had entrusted some color lab to transfer my negatives into digital images. Their scan job is crappy at best. Possible Solution: Now I am left with the task of having to scan hundreds of photographs so as to preserve them. Or to photograph with my 4 megapixel Sony.
Tools: Adobe CS [aka Photoshop 8] and HP Scanjet 7400c in XP Pro

When I scan some photos that have more dark fields than others, the problem is intensely amplified. For example, there are these micro-organisms that feed off the paper which in turn puts a dent into the photo. Ordinarily I use the close tool to fix this problem. But what I am wondering is if there are other ways to obviate this problem before I even transfer it into the Adobe workspace from the scanner. I can provide a sample photo to illustrate the problem in JPG form for those who give me an answer. Thanks in advance! AJ

Get a film scanner and scan the negatives again. Scratch and dust removing functions are available in modern devices (->Google).
Scanning Photos (=paper prints) will not give the quality a good film scanner allows for.

Do not use a flatbed scanner with negative option.

Michael