Scanning old photographs and negatives
Discussion
Right, there is a 1m x 0.5m x 0.5m wooden chest pretty much full of extended family photographs (and negatives) taken through the years. So a mix of colour and sepia/B&W photos of various sizes.
I would like to get digital copies of them all so me and my sister can have good quality copies whoever has the original or not!
I will probably be doing this by myself.
Can anyone recommend a scanner and scanner setting in order to scan photos properly. I've searched online by the information isn't that clear and varies from site to site. From my reading it seems that if it isn't colour it's better just to scan in B&W?
What about the negatives? Most of them will probably have printed photos. Worth worrying about these negatives?
What about the negatives that don't have printed photos? What is the best way to deal with these? Obviously these will require some post-processing once they are scanned. Any help in this area?
I would like to get digital copies of them all so me and my sister can have good quality copies whoever has the original or not!
I will probably be doing this by myself.
Can anyone recommend a scanner and scanner setting in order to scan photos properly. I've searched online by the information isn't that clear and varies from site to site. From my reading it seems that if it isn't colour it's better just to scan in B&W?
What about the negatives? Most of them will probably have printed photos. Worth worrying about these negatives?
What about the negatives that don't have printed photos? What is the best way to deal with these? Obviously these will require some post-processing once they are scanned. Any help in this area?
Edited by AndrewEH1 on Tuesday 11th November 14:25
AndrewEH1 said:
Right, there is a 1m x 0.5m x 0.5m wooden chest pretty much full of extended family photographs (and negatives) taken through the years. So a mix of colour and sepia/B&W photos of various sizes.
I would like to get digital copies of them all so me and my sister can have good quality copies whoever has the original or not!
I will probably be doing this by myself.
Can anyone recommend a scanner and scanner setting in order to scan photos properly. I've searched online by the information isn't that clear and varies from site to site. From my reading it seems that if it isn't colour it's better just to scan in B&W?
What about the negatives? Most of them will probably have printed photos. Worth worrying about these negatives?
What about the negatives that don't have printed photos? What is the best way to deal with these? Obviously these will require some post-processing once they are scanned. Any help in this area?
Hmm.I would like to get digital copies of them all so me and my sister can have good quality copies whoever has the original or not!
I will probably be doing this by myself.
Can anyone recommend a scanner and scanner setting in order to scan photos properly. I've searched online by the information isn't that clear and varies from site to site. From my reading it seems that if it isn't colour it's better just to scan in B&W?
What about the negatives? Most of them will probably have printed photos. Worth worrying about these negatives?
What about the negatives that don't have printed photos? What is the best way to deal with these? Obviously these will require some post-processing once they are scanned. Any help in this area?
Edited by AndrewEH1 on Tuesday 11th November 14:25
How much time do you have spare?
Let's start at the simple part.
If for most of the printed images all you really need is a copy of whatever they offer then a flat bed copier will probably do the job for memorabilia purposes. One with dedicated photo capability (do most have that now?) should be fine.
If you want to enhance some or all of them then you probably need a photo dedicated scanner so that you can fine tune the results and print onto photographic style paper of some sort. Software would allow you to tweak and repair images as you go. It's not generally a fast process (depending on the scanning resolution) and there may be a learning curve to get things to look 'right' if you are particular about that.
For the film based stuff - negative film or positive slides can be scanned using flatbed or dedicated film scanners. Or, if you have no time to go down that path (it's not a rapid process - would suit a savvy pensioner with agoraphobia) you can find places that will do it for you providing you are prepared to let them have the film. Otherwise you need a scanner with a dedicated photo scanning facility and a fair bit of time or a very specific selection rather than a "lets do them all and see what comes out" approach.
So I would suggest that firstly you and your sister have a good look through what you have and try to work out what you think you would like to do with each image. That will help you estimate the scale of the project.
If you own a digital camera another alternative is to obtain, for a few pounds, a set up that allows you to copy slides and negatives directly to a digital file in the camera. This can be quite fast, especially for mounted slides, but may or may not give the quality you would like and dealing with dust can be annoying (as it can with scanners). One can, with care, also get some decent results copying photos the same way although getting the light right can be tricky for obtaining the best quality.
Having done this a couple of years ago I would echo the previous posters & suggest that you decide how fussy you are about the results (you talk about 'good quality copies'), how keen you are to have a complete set of copies & how much time you want to spend doing it.
The best quality will come from copying the negatives but only if you use a proper film scanner. if you go down this route then I strongly suggest a scanner & software with IR dust removal as it's very difficult to remove all of the dust on the negative. Plustek do some reasonably priced scanners with software. If you do decide to do it yourself it's a very slow process but ideal for long winter nights.
You might also consider sending them off to an scanning service. A quick search shows one site charging 14p per frame for 1000+ so for £140 you could process 27 reels of negatives. You can send off for sample scans so you could see what the results were like.
I would say the first step is to sort the whole lot out first & then triage them to see what is really worth processing. There is probably a substantial number that aren't worth doing.
The best quality will come from copying the negatives but only if you use a proper film scanner. if you go down this route then I strongly suggest a scanner & software with IR dust removal as it's very difficult to remove all of the dust on the negative. Plustek do some reasonably priced scanners with software. If you do decide to do it yourself it's a very slow process but ideal for long winter nights.
You might also consider sending them off to an scanning service. A quick search shows one site charging 14p per frame for 1000+ so for £140 you could process 27 reels of negatives. You can send off for sample scans so you could see what the results were like.
I would say the first step is to sort the whole lot out first & then triage them to see what is really worth processing. There is probably a substantial number that aren't worth doing.
That's for the pointers so far. Good points about sorting first and working out what we both want to do with them.
My general idea is to have a good quality copy of each one. I haven't had eyes on them for a while as they are at our dad's house.
I'll speak to both of them in the next week.
I'd prefer to go down the scanning route as the cropping and lighting issues with just taking photos of photos.
My general idea is to have a good quality copy of each one. I haven't had eyes on them for a while as they are at our dad's house.
I'll speak to both of them in the next week.
I'd prefer to go down the scanning route as the cropping and lighting issues with just taking photos of photos.
AndrewEH1 said:
That's for the pointers so far. Good points about sorting first and working out what we both want to do with them.
My general idea is to have a good quality copy of each one. I haven't had eyes on them for a while as they are at our dad's house.
I'll speak to both of them in the next week.
I'd prefer to go down the scanning route as the cropping and lighting issues with just taking photos of photos.
Whatever you decide to do I would highly recommend that if you don't have the space for the photographs, then you at least keep hold of the negatives for scanning by future generations who by then may possess much higher quality imaging hardware and software than is currently available!My general idea is to have a good quality copy of each one. I haven't had eyes on them for a while as they are at our dad's house.
I'll speak to both of them in the next week.
I'd prefer to go down the scanning route as the cropping and lighting issues with just taking photos of photos.
I purchased a standalone scanner by Agfa for scanning hundreds of 35mm negatives from the 1980s, it was far sharper than using a flatbed scanner scanning a photograph and a good deal faster, though wasn't very good at scanning transparencies because it tended to burn out the image.
The advantage of the standalone scanners is that they don't need to be connected to a computer, so you can scan away whenever and wherever you like. The images on the Agfa scanner I used were stored on a SD card which you can later transfer to your computer. If you're interested, do a search on Amazon for 'Negative Scanner'.
In terms of tidying up the scans for scratches, colour balance and other unwanted blemishes, take a look at Google Picasa which offers some very good options, or perhaps Adobe Lightroom which many of my photo mad friends swear by. The top dog is of course the hugely expensive Adobe Photoshop - but I think that is a bit overkill for your needs!
I have a negative scanner and it's sat in it's delivery box for about 18 months now. When scanning negatives you suddenly become aware of how much dust, hair and general grease is on them, so what starts out as a simple 'let's digitalise it' turns into a 15 minute photoshop on each, multip[ly by a couple of hundred and it's painful
Scanning the prints (if they're still good quality) at either 300 or 600 dpi is fine at jpeg level. I personally wouldnt bother with TIFFs and other formats, while storage is cheap you're not going to get enough advantage from the format because of the source
Scanning the prints (if they're still good quality) at either 300 or 600 dpi is fine at jpeg level. I personally wouldnt bother with TIFFs and other formats, while storage is cheap you're not going to get enough advantage from the format because of the source
FWIW here is a recent review of a recently announced Epson flatbed scanner.
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/scanner...
It goes into some technicalities that may not mean much if you have not used a scanner before BUT is generally readable and puts things into perspective in terms of casual use vs dedicated photo enthusiast requirements.
This device uses LED technology so has a faster start up and lower heat output then earlier models and maybe higher detail extraction capability too - but I suspect that will not be a great concern unless treating the originals as "fine art". The faster start up is welcome of course but takes a few seconds of a process that may take many minutes per scan run if you use the highest resolution for negatives/slides.
Scanner technology has pretty much stopped progressing for a number of years as film became less popular. The main manufacturers mostly stopped making dedicated 35mm film scanners 5 or 6 years ago. People tend to but used ones (or used to, I have not checked the market for some time) use them and then sell them on. Whether the older kit still works reliably I don't know. Likewise there may be issues with drivers for the latest computer operating systems .... not sure. In any event of you have prints and film a flatbed scanner with dedicated photo scanning capabilities probably makes the most sense.
I have an Epson scanner from 2 models 'families' before the one being reviewed. I probably use it once a year - if that. (It's not permanently set up as I don't have the luxury of space for it. I have a half finished project to complete ..... one day. Maybe this winter .....
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/scanner...
It goes into some technicalities that may not mean much if you have not used a scanner before BUT is generally readable and puts things into perspective in terms of casual use vs dedicated photo enthusiast requirements.
This device uses LED technology so has a faster start up and lower heat output then earlier models and maybe higher detail extraction capability too - but I suspect that will not be a great concern unless treating the originals as "fine art". The faster start up is welcome of course but takes a few seconds of a process that may take many minutes per scan run if you use the highest resolution for negatives/slides.
Scanner technology has pretty much stopped progressing for a number of years as film became less popular. The main manufacturers mostly stopped making dedicated 35mm film scanners 5 or 6 years ago. People tend to but used ones (or used to, I have not checked the market for some time) use them and then sell them on. Whether the older kit still works reliably I don't know. Likewise there may be issues with drivers for the latest computer operating systems .... not sure. In any event of you have prints and film a flatbed scanner with dedicated photo scanning capabilities probably makes the most sense.
I have an Epson scanner from 2 models 'families' before the one being reviewed. I probably use it once a year - if that. (It's not permanently set up as I don't have the luxury of space for it. I have a half finished project to complete ..... one day. Maybe this winter .....
Edited by LongQ on Friday 14th November 01:31
Amazon list quite a few standalone negative and slide scanners like this one: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jumbl-High-Resolution-4-In...
I don't have any experience with this particular unit, but it does seem to have quite a few very good reviews and it has a far better LCD display than the Agfa Duoscan 100 film and negative scanner that I purchased quite a few years ago from Amazon.
I don't have any experience with this particular unit, but it does seem to have quite a few very good reviews and it has a far better LCD display than the Agfa Duoscan 100 film and negative scanner that I purchased quite a few years ago from Amazon.
Well now, by coincidence I spotted a post on the Luminous Landscape site about a couple of approaches to "scanning" film stock using digital cameras.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/scannerle...
Bear in mind that LL and its writers tend to be at the higher end of Photography fine art endeavours so, as the post points out near the end, there may well be lower cost and complexity solution available that would, for most people and most of their images, produce very satisfactory results.
I have not read the full pdf but the summary description suggests that the workflow rather than the outright quality of the kit used is likely to be the key to success.
Probably nothing really new in there - here is an article and some post by its readers from back in 2012 ....
http://petapixel.com/2012/05/18/how-to-scan-film-n...
The issues that I can see would be the need for careful handling of the film to avoid damage (scratches and so on that would add to the amount of fixing effort required later) and the matter of dust particles .... the same sort of of problems for later processing efforts.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/scannerle...
Bear in mind that LL and its writers tend to be at the higher end of Photography fine art endeavours so, as the post points out near the end, there may well be lower cost and complexity solution available that would, for most people and most of their images, produce very satisfactory results.
I have not read the full pdf but the summary description suggests that the workflow rather than the outright quality of the kit used is likely to be the key to success.
Probably nothing really new in there - here is an article and some post by its readers from back in 2012 ....
http://petapixel.com/2012/05/18/how-to-scan-film-n...
The issues that I can see would be the need for careful handling of the film to avoid damage (scratches and so on that would add to the amount of fixing effort required later) and the matter of dust particles .... the same sort of of problems for later processing efforts.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff