I have uploaded a photograph of my ancestor.  He is wearing an army
uniform and I would appreciate it if someone could identify it.  He
was
born in Ireland in 1895, I don't know where at the moment.  I assume
he
joined the army when he was 18 in 1913 and I know he was in the Army
in
or around Inverkeithing in Scotland.  He finished in the army in 1915
because he joined the Metropolitan Police in London on 3rd May 1915
and
was stationed at Wandsworth Police Station until his early death in
1938.

Any help or advice would be appreciated.

Is there any hope for daguerrotypes that are either faded or somehow turned
black?  Does certain equipment bring out hidden images, or can I try to
clean them?  Yes, I realize I'm probably dreaming.

-- Delaware Dolores

In letterpress printing, all type was set up backwards in metal, and photos
were converted into dots, looking somewhat like today's negatives.  Photos
then had to be backed by wood, to bring the entire page up to the height of
the type and headlines.  Someone gave me two of these metal photos, backed
by wood, and I'd like to know how to get an image from it without inking
into the dots and potentially destroying it!  One is a portrait of a man,
about 2 by 3 inches.

-- Delaware Dolores

This is interesting. I have never done this, but the first thing I would
try is scanning at a high resolution (600 dpi) and then opening the file
in Photoshop. You might get a negative image, but it can be reversed in
Photoshop. Then the image can possibly be enhanced/restored.
As I said, I have never worked on this type of photo, and I cannot
guarantee success, but would love to see if it is possible. What I'm
suggesting would not damage the photo in any way.
Please keep me informed on your progress.
Best regards
John J.


Dol Sol wrote:

>In letterpress printing, all type was set up backwards in metal, and photos
>were converted into dots, looking somewhat like today's negatives.  Photos
>then had to be backed by wood, to bring the entire page up to the height of
>the type and headlines.  Someone gave me two of these metal photos, backed
>by wood, and I'd like to know how to get an image from it without inking
>into the dots and potentially destroying it!  One is a portrait of a man,
>about 2 by 3 inches.
>
>-- Delaware Dolores
>
>
>
>
>
>GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
>Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
>Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
>Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

It is possible to restore these images using Adobe Photoshop. The degree
of success would depend on how badly the original was degraded.
Best regards (again)
John J.

Dol Sol wrote:

>Is there any hope for daguerrotypes that are either faded or somehow turned
>black?  Does certain equipment bring out hidden images, or can I try to
>clean them?  Yes, I realize I'm probably dreaming.
>
>-- Delaware Dolores
>
>
>
>
>
>GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
>Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
>Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
>Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

The restoration of daguerreoptypes that have faded is best done by copying.
This is difficult since you are in fact photographing a mirror.  It is done
with a view camera, where the front standard can rise, so the camera can
look at the dag without reflecting itself.  You build a black tent around
the lens and dag, and light from the sides, and shoot with cross-polarized
light.  The resulting 4x5 transparency is scanned and the restoration done
in photoshop.

For many years, recommendations were published about a wet treatment for
cleaning daguerreotypes using thiourea, commonly marketed as Tarn-X and
similar products.  This has have been found to be very harmful to the image
over time and is no longer recommended.

A book was published by Smithsonian conservators that is the best source of
information about dag conservation, it is called "The Daguerreotype:
Nineteenth Century Technology and Modern Science" by M. Susan Barger and
William B. White, perhaps your local library has or can get you this book.

In short, make no attempt to open the dag and do anything without some study
and practice.  Do not use a tissue, brush, or anything to clean the surface
because it will scratch the image permanently.  Do not use compressed air to
blow the dust off it, the air will blow the image right off it.  A
daguerreotype is extremely fragile.

I can recommend a professional photo conservator if you need, he is the
curator of photography at the art museum here.  there is an email group of
professional photo conservation technicians that you can check out, it is
photoconservation@yahoogroups

As to the print blocks, they are very sturdy and you don't have to worry
about the ink damaging them.  Take them to an old-time printer who uses
letterpress.  They can print them.  You scan the print they make.  Since
they are half-tone, there will be a moire pattern in your scan.  Don't use
the "descreen" option in the scanner driver if you have Photoshop.  Scan it
straight and then get rid of the moire by opening the image in PS and using
Filter/Blur/Gaussian Blur.  You can see exactly how much to use for your
particular image.  Usually it is about 1.6 to 2.

Good luck

--
Thomas Robinson
http://www.historicphotoarchive.com

You might also try taking a photo of them with either a film or digital camera
making sure that you have a good light source that will not throw shadows. When
I do this I have set up a box with a hole for my camera lens and a couple of
lights that will light below my camera. Then you can import into a photo editing
program.

good luck
G Hopkins

"John C. Jernigan" <heritage-arts@...> wrote:
This is interesting. I have never done this, but the first thing I would
try is scanning at a high resolution (600 dpi) and then opening the file
in Photoshop. You might get a negative image, but it can be reversed in
Photoshop. Then the image can possibly be enhanced/restored.
As I said, I have never worked on this type of photo, and I cannot
guarantee success, but would love to see if it is possible. What I'm
suggesting would not damage the photo in any way.
Please keep me informed on your progress.
Best regards
John J.


Dol Sol wrote:

>In letterpress printing, all type was set up backwards in metal, and photos
>were converted into dots, looking somewhat like today's negatives.  Photos
>then had to be backed by wood, to bring the entire page up to the height of
>the type and headlines.  Someone gave me two of these metal photos, backed
>by wood, and I'd like to know how to get an image from it without inking
>into the dots and potentially destroying it!  One is a portrait of a man,
>about 2 by 3 inches.
>
>-- Delaware Dolores
>
>
>
>
>
>GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
>Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
>Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
>Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

    To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
  Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yes, I agree - you would be surprised at how much can be recovered from a
seemingly useless dguerrotype using a good scanner and photoshop.

	 Paul R.

>
>It is possible to restore these images using Adobe Photoshop. The degree
>of success would depend on how badly the original was degraded.
>Best regards (again)
>John J.
>
>Dol Sol wrote:
>
>>Is there any hope for daguerrotypes that are either faded or somehow turned
>>black?  Does certain equipment bring out hidden images, or can I try to
>>clean them?  Yes, I realize I'm probably dreaming.

If you are going to scan the dag and have photoshop full version (rather
than elements) you would do well to scan at 16 bit, since the contrast range
is so short, you will avoid banding if your scanner driver can deliver 16
bit to PS and then set the levels.  To set levels in photoshop (after vers
6) hold down the two keys to the left of the space bar while you move the
cursor to the high and low points.  The screen will be blank until you clip
and then the screen will show only the clipping.  This is the best way I
know to scan a short-scale image without clipping and banding.

--
Thomas Robinson
http://www.historicphotoarchive.com

> Yes, I agree - you would be surprised at how much can be recovered from a
> seemingly useless dguerrotype using a good scanner and photoshop.
>
> Paul R.
>
>>
>> It is possible to restore these images using Adobe Photoshop. The degree
>> of success would depend on how badly the original was degraded.
>> Best regards (again)
>> John J.
>>
>> Dol Sol wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any hope for daguerrotypes that are either faded or somehow turned
>>> black?  Does certain equipment bring out hidden images, or can I try to
>>> clean them?  Yes, I realize I'm probably dreaming.

An unorthodox suggestion - I'd get some tracing paper or even greaseproof
paper + a soft lead pencil, put the tracing paper on the wood + run the
pencil across it from side to side - that way what is proud of the surface
will be marked on the tracing paper -  it might work?

Suzanne



Message: 2
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 07:55:26 -0400
From: "Dol Sol" <dol_sol@...>
Subject: Bet this will stump you . . .

In letterpress printing, all type was set up backwards in metal, and photos
were converted into dots, looking somewhat like today's negatives. Photos
then had to be backed by wood, to bring the entire page up to the height of
the type and headlines. Someone gave me two of these metal photos, backed
by wood, and I'd like to know how to get an image from it without inking
into the dots and potentially destroying it! One is a portrait of a man,
about 2 by 3 inches.

-- Delaware Dolores




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________


GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links




------------------------------------------------------------------------

Greetings:
I've been told that it was ok to use scotch tape to fasten photos to the matt
board. I've also heard that there is an acid free archival cloth tape that
should be used instead.
Can someone help me with this matter, what is proper to use for matting?
Sincerely and Thanks,
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Suzanne, how clever!  Just like tombstone rubbing (so why didn't I think of
that? )  Of course, I jumped right up and tried it, taking care to rub at
length in all directions over the metal plate glued to the wood, without
letting the paper budge one hair!

Since the particular block I have is very small, and the dots surprisingly
close (considering the year I think it was cast) it didn't produce a great
result.  But, Susanne, I would bet you are "on to something" for a no-cost/
no harm technique that would work with larger photos.

As for Thomas Robinson's suggestion to visit a letterpress printer, does
anyone know one in the Delaware/S.Jersey/ Phila. area, particularly one with
an experimental spirit?  If I get this done, of course I will post again
about the results, and share images with those who contact me off site.

John C. Jernigan's suggestion about scanning and then using PhotoShop is
equally appreciated.  I do have PhotoShop, but after reading recent posts
from you guru's about advanced scanners, I should probably just take it
somewhere to an expert.  I couldn't justify buying an upscale scanner I
won't need more than a few times.

Apparently these photo "blocks" were sometimes given out like souvenirs,
after a newspaper was printed.  The same family also kept a block picturing
a church that I can't ID, either, but I have an educated guess as to who the
man is (a true egotist!)
-- Dolores L. Solberg, Dover DE

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Suzanne" <a.s.hines@...>

An unorthodox suggestion - I'd get some tracing paper or even greaseproof
paper + a soft lead pencil, put the tracing paper on the wood + run the
pencil across it from side to side - that way what is proud of the surface
will be marked on the tracing paper -  it might work?

Suzanne

===
Subject: (Dolores) Bet this will stump you . . .

In letterpress printing, all type was set up backwards in metal, and photos
were converted into dots, looking somewhat like today's negatives. Photos
then had to be backed by wood, to bring the entire page up to the height of
the type and headlines. Someone gave me two of these metal photos, backed
by wood, and I'd like to know how to get an image from it without inking
into the dots and potentially destroying it! One is a portrait of a man,
about 2 by 3 inches.

-- Delaware Dolores

Suzanne, how clever!  Just like tombstone rubbing (so why didn't I think of
that? )  Of course, I jumped right up and tried it, taking care to rub well
in all directions over the paper-covered metal, without letting the paper
budge.

Since the particular block I have is very small, and the dots awfully close,
it didn't produce a great result, but I would bet you are "on to something"
for a no-cost/ho harm technique that would work with larger photos.

As for the other suggestion about visiting a letterpress printer, does
anyone know one in the Delaware/S.Jersey/ Phila. area, particularly one with
an experimental spirit?  When I get this done, of course I will post again,
about the results.  Apparently these photo "blocks" were sometimes given out
like souvenirs, after a paper was printed.  The same family kept one of a
church I can't ID, either, but I have a very educated guess as to who the
man is (a true egotist!)

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Suzanne" <a.s.hines@...>

An unorthodox suggestion - I'd get some tracing paper or even greaseproof
paper + a soft lead pencil, put the tracing paper on the wood + run the
pencil across it from side to side - that way what is proud of the surface
will be marked on the tracing paper -  it might work?

Suzanne

===
Subject: Bet this will stump you . . .

In letterpress printing, all type was set up backwards in metal, and photos
were converted into dots, looking somewhat like today's negatives. Photos
then had to be backed by wood, to bring the entire page up to the height of
the type and headlines. Someone gave me two of these metal photos, backed
by wood, and I'd like to know how to get an image from it without inking
into the dots and potentially destroying it! One is a portrait of a man,
about 2 by 3 inches.

-- Delaware Dolores

I've learned to my dismay that scotch tape is the wrong thing to use. I've
damaged several photo's using it.  I'm not sure the proper way to mat but have
had a nice expericance with using a piece of paper just a smudge larger than the
photo placed over the photo and taped that to the mat it holds the photo in
place but doesn't damage it.

G Hopkins

HDMShort@... wrote:
Greetings:
I've been told that it was ok to use scotch tape to fasten photos to the matt
board. I've also heard that there is an acid free archival cloth tape that
should be used instead.
Can someone help me with this matter, what is proper to use for matting?
Sincerely and Thanks,
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

    To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
  Make Yahoo! your home page

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Light Impressions carries photo mounting tape that is archival. Their
web-site is www.lightimpressionsdirect.com
They carry a full line of archival products.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gwen Hopkins <ldytramp@...>
To: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 19 May 2005 06:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [genphoto] Matt Photos

     I've learned to my dismay that scotch tape is the wrong thing to
use. I've
damaged several photo's using it.  I'm not sure the proper way to mat
but have
had a nice expericance with using a piece of paper just a smudge larger
than the
photo placed over the photo and taped that to the mat it holds the
photo in
place but doesn't damage it.

G Hopkins

HDMShort@... wrote:
Greetings:
I've been told that it was ok to use scotch tape to fasten photos to
the matt
board. I've also heard that there is an acid free archival cloth tape
that
should be used instead.
Can someone help me with this matter, what is proper to use for matting?
Sincerely and Thanks,
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address,
use
editor@...




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

    To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
  Make Yahoo! your home page

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address,
use
editor@...

Yahoo! Groups Links

Manufacturers offer "archival tape" however its use is not generally
recommended by archivists.  For mounting loose photographs, archival
mounting corners are recommended, these are clear polyester with a
self-stick adhesive on the back, these are made by Light Impressions in
several sizes and are very inexpensive.  Many art supply stores carry them.

The definition of archival mounting is that it is completely reversible, so
you never want to put tape on a photo if you can avoid it.

Professional photo conservators occasionally need to tape photographs, and
the industry standard tape for this use is the Filmoplast P50.

Ordinary scotch tape is not useable, it is very acidic and will destroy
paper.  Scotch has recently introduced "archival tape", meaning that the
adhesive is non-acidic, it is marketed as type 888 and 889.

Picture framers frequently use the ATG tape to attach the front mat to the
back mat.  this tape should never touch the photo.

All of these products are available from Light Impressions, phone
800-826-6216, they will send you a free catalog.

The problem that conservators have with tape on photos is that sooner or
later it has to be removed.  This is a very time-consuming and laborious
task.  You have to use very strong chemicals, and pick away at the tape
residue, you can't rub it off because that just forces the residue deeper
into the paper fiber.  It may take a couple of hours to remove each tape
mark, and it is risky work.

--
Thomas Robinson
http://www.historicphotoarchive.com

I don't know about scotch tape - I do know you need to use something that is
acid free.
Carolyn

HDMShort@... wrote:
Greetings:
I've been told that it was ok to use scotch tape to fasten photos to the matt
board. I've also heard that there is an acid free archival cloth tape that
should be used instead.
Can someone help me with this matter, what is proper to use for matting?
Sincerely and Thanks,
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...

Yahoo! Groups Links








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

For those of you who are looking for scanners, etc.  There is an international
group - www.Freecycle.org that has various independent Yahoo Groups set up for
various areas worldwide.  Many times, members will offer scanners, or other
items you may have a need for.

Their general posting rules are:

1 - Make an OFFER before you post a WANT
2 - Keep it legal, keep it clean, and keep it free.

These items may not always be in 'perfect' condition - they may need a cable
wire (which you may already have), or they may be older items.

Anyway, thought I'd just pass this info along to any of you who may be
interested.

Have a great Memorial Day Week-end.
Dawn


Really Support Our Troops - Volunteer!
Services4ServiceMembers@yahoogroups.com
Reuse, Reduce, Recycle!
www.FreeCycle.org
Caregiving Cooking Challenge?
Soft-Foods@...


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dawn,

I belong to Freecycle and it is great.  I haven't gotten anything from them,
but I have given away tons of things like - a washing machine, computers,
printers, monitors, luggage, etc.  This is a great group and a wonderful way
to pass things along.

Linda

-------Original Message-------

From: Dawn Soger
Date: 05/29/05 11:42:42
To: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [genphoto] Slightly OT information...

For those of you who are looking for scanners, etc.  There is an
international group - www.Freecycle.org that has various independent Yahoo
Groups set up for various areas worldwide.  Many times, members will offer
scanners, or other items you may have a need for.

Their general posting rules are:

1 - Make an OFFER before you post a WANT
2 - Keep it legal, keep it clean, and keep it free.

These items may not always be in 'perfect' condition - they may need a cable
wire (which you may already have), or they may be older items.

Anyway, thought I'd just pass this info along to any of you who may be
interested.

Have a great Memorial Day Week-end.
Dawn


Really Support Our Troops - Volunteer!
Services4ServiceMembers@yahoogroups.com
Reuse, Reduce, Recycle!
www.FreeCycle.org
Caregiving Cooking Challenge?
Soft-Foods@...


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...





Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I think used scanners are a good idea, since new warranties expire at only
12 months now.  Microtek will not sell parts or service for any scanner out
of warranty, and I hear Epson has adopted this policy too.  So when my new
Artixscan that cost $1450 needed repair at the tender age of 14 months, all
the factory offered to do is exchange it for $850 plus shipping.  The only
problem with it was a line in the scan, which turned out to be dirt on the
mirror.  I did not want to throw good money after bad, so I learned how to
clean it myself.

Last January I needed a oversize scanner (A3 size, 11x17")  and new Microtek
was $1500, new Epson was $2600, used ones were $600 with no guarantee.  So I
bought a used Umax Mirage IISE on ebay for $75 plus shipping.  The seller
packed it poorly and it was destroyed in shipping.  Postal insurance does
not cover damage to equipment if there is no visible sign of damage on the
outside of the box.  Well, the seller was liquidating a pallet load of them,
and he sent me another one, which worked fine after cleaning.

In a scanner, the image goes through two glass surfaces and three mirrors
before the lens.  If you look at the glass surface inside a scanner that is
a year or more old, you will see all the haze, and that is cumulative on all
the mirrors too.  Scanners need to be dismantled and cleaned every six
months or so.  If you find yourself using the sharpening tool in photoshop
to fix unsharp scans, that is probably what is wrong.

I used denatured alcohol and tissue to clean the mirrors, and water on the
glass.   I got a decent oversize scanner and saved a thousand dollars or
more.
--
Thomas Robinson
http://www.historicphotoarchive.com

Great tips!  Thank you for sharing!
Dawn

genphoto@yahoogroups.com wrote:

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 11:36:45 -0700
From: Historic Photo Archive
Subject: Re: Slightly OT information...

I think used scanners are a good idea, since new warranties expire at only
12 months now. Microtek will not sell parts or service for any scanner out
of warranty, and I hear Epson has adopted this policy too. So when my new
Artixscan that cost $1450 needed repair at the tender age of 14 months, all
the factory offered to do is exchange it for $850 plus shipping. The only
problem with it was a line in the scan, which turned out to be dirt on the
mirror. I did not want to throw good money after bad, so I learned how to
clean it myself.

Last January I needed a oversize scanner (A3 size, 11x17") and new Microtek
was $1500, new Epson was $2600, used ones were $600 with no guarantee. So I
bought a used Umax Mirage IISE on ebay for $75 plus shipping. The seller
packed it poorly and it was destroyed in shipping. Postal insurance does
not cover damage to equipment if there is no visible sign of damage on the
outside of the box. Well, the seller was liquidating a pallet load of them,
and he sent me another one, which worked fine after cleaning.

In a scanner, the image goes through two glass surfaces and three mirrors
before the lens. If you look at the glass surface inside a scanner that is
a year or more old, you will see all the haze, and that is cumulative on all
the mirrors too. Scanners need to be dismantled and cleaned every six
months or so. If you find yourself using the sharpening tool in photoshop
to fix unsharp scans, that is probably what is wrong.

I used denatured alcohol and tissue to clean the mirrors, and water on the
glass. I got a decent oversize scanner and saved a thousand dollars or
more.
--
Thomas Robinson
http://www.historicphotoarchive.com

Really Support Our Troops - Volunteer!
Services4ServiceMembers@yahoogroups.com
Reuse, Reduce, Recycle!
www.FreeCycle.org
Caregiving Cooking Challenge?
Soft-Foods@...


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We have boxes and boxes of family photos that we want to organize and
preserve for our enjoyment and for future generations, and I'm
interested in knowing how others have done this. We have:



-          Some very old pictures from past generations. (This includes
some pictures of people we can't identify.) This is not a large quantity
of pictures, so storing and organizing isn't overwhelming. We're just
trying to be sure we preserve them. My husband scans them for his
genealogy records, and we preserve the originals.



-          My parents' collection of pictures, mostly our family as we
were growing up. Some are duplicates; some are photographer portraits;
most are just snapshots of varying quality. A lot of them aren't
labeled, but right now we know who most of them are. (Future generations
won't, so whatever we do with these pictures needs to be done now.)
There are a LOT of pictures, and I wonder if we should pare them down to
the best ones and organize them. (Space is a consideration, but It's
very hard for me to think of discarding even the most out-of-focus
family picture. I am just paralyzed on this project, not being able to
decide how to begin.)



-          Our own very large collection of pictures that we've
accumulated as a family-many treasured pictures are colored snapshots
that have yellowed. Some of them I mounted in those magnetic photo
albums before I knew better. Many others are in drawers waiting for me
to figure out how I want to handle them.



I'm sure ours isn't a unique situation, and I'm interested in what
others have done.



I appreciate any experience and suggestions you can share.



Ann Stewart



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Could anyone suggest a scanner that I can use for large glass negatives -
largest 1 is approx 6in x 4in - thanks

Suzanne

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I'm putting my old family photos in archival sleeves and filing in folders
(in a file cabinet) according to surname.  I use a 'general surname'
folder(for group photos and miscellaneous), then individual folders for 
individuals
with lots of photos.  I am filing women by their maiden  names.  An alternate
I've considered is putting them in sleeves in  notebooks, but some are just too
big for that.  Hope this helps (are you  Ann Stewart of Ft. Smith?)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Try copying the glass slides on a light table and invert them with Photoshop
Elements.
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Copy the large negatives on a light table with your digital camera and then
you can invert them in Photoshop Elements.
Sorry I left out the part about using a digital camera in my first reply.
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Unidentified photos of interesting subjects can be kept in the genealogy
scrapbooks of the previous owner of the photo. Some may have a clue in the
location of the photo studio.

I had an experience with mixed up pictures when a genealogy file was copied
to a laptop for a meeting demo. One son's picture was displayed for his
father. Be sure to test the picture files to see if they will print in the
desired size and position. Some genealogy programs work best with matching
size rectangular pictures for reports and charts may look best with oval
face pictures.

My method is to keep a computer genealogy scrapbook telling the life story
of each indivdual or marriage with detailed captions. Pictures will print
right-size in family books without adding them one by one to a word
processor. Other researchers save up to four sizes of each picture for use
in charts, books and copies printed one at a time.

File names are very important so pictures can be identified separately from
a numbered image database. You will also want a way to copy all the pictures
for a branch. It is no kindness to send all pictures when a cousin wants the
pictures for 1/8 or less of the file. -- Elizabeth

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ann Stewart"
> -          Some very old pictures from past generations. (This includes
> some pictures of people we can't identify.) This is not a large quantity
> of pictures, so storing and organizing isn't overwhelming. We're just
> trying to be sure we preserve them. My husband scans them for his
> genealogy records, and we preserve the originals.

I have many old family photographs from one side of my family and very
few from my mother's side. On my husband's side I have borrowed
photographs and had copies made. I plan on putting them in albums
starting with the ones of my husband and working back the five
generations that I have. I only have about a dozen snapshots to deal
with for my husband growing up years.  On my side of the family there
are very few formal photographs of my Mother's family and I am going to
do the same thing. On my Father's side are many photographs, snapshots
and pictures taken of old family portraits. There again I am putting
them in albums according to generations and plan on printing out a
family tree that shows "who is who". I have had three copies made of
each picture and am doing an album for each of our children.
Fortunately my paternal grandmother wrote names on all of her
photographs. The photographs that are not direct family are being given
to people who are more closely related. I am trying to collect pictures
of my eight great uncles and aunts on my Mother's side because I grew
up knowing all of them.  I have also tried to return pictures of my
grandmother's college friends (she finished in 1908) to descendants. If
the only picture of an ancestor is not very good I still plan on
putting it in an album.  My only debate with myself has been whether to
work the old snapshots taken by my grandmother in with the more formal
studio photographs. My grandmother took many pictures and her black and
white negatives still print reasonably well. A good many of these
pictures have been scanned to CDs and put in a safe deposit box. As
technology changes they may need to be updated. I am using Creative
Memories albums but am not planning on using stickers, etc. for these
albums. After what I am calling the Ancestor books are done I will
start in on the 60 years of pictures I have taken over the years -- if
I live long enough!! All of my some 1,600 slides have been culled and
are on CDs and I had prints made of the ones I want to put in an album.

I would welcome any comments and suggestions!

I'm sure that each person with this problem has a different idea.  I can tell
you what not to do.  Don't just scan them and drop them in a generic file labled
photo's.  I'm now going back through all of my many family photo disks and
placeing them in files labled with the appropeate family.  With in the large
family I'm creating sub families so that it is easier to find the different
photo's

I've also discovered that scanning a photo once at at least 600 dpi's and saving
it is best.  You can then size that scan to what ever size you need.  This is
better for the orginal photo as once you have a good scan or copy you can store
the orginal away and not comprise it. Make at least one copy of you scaned photo
so that you don't lose it.

I have a master copy and a file that is a copy of my master.  I use the copy of
the master to resize and copy for family members keeping my master copy for in
case something happens to my copy of the master copy. I would also suggest that
you make copies that are not stored on your computer's hard drive as the hard
drive can become corrupted and you will lose all of the photo's stored on it.
Store your photo's in a JPEG format as most computers can read that format.

G Hopkins

Ann Stewart <annstewart@...> wrote:
We have boxes and boxes of family photos that we want to organize and
preserve for our enjoyment and for future generations, and I'm
interested in knowing how others have done this. We have:



-          Some very old pictures from past generations. (This includes
some pictures of people we can't identify.) This is not a large quantity
of pictures, so storing and organizing isn't overwhelming. We're just
trying to be sure we preserve them. My husband scans them for his
genealogy records, and we preserve the originals.



-          My parents' collection of pictures, mostly our family as we
were growing up. Some are duplicates; some are photographer portraits;
most are just snapshots of varying quality. A lot of them aren't
labeled, but right now we know who most of them are. (Future generations
won't, so whatever we do with these pictures needs to be done now.)
There are a LOT of pictures, and I wonder if we should pare them down to
the best ones and organize them. (Space is a consideration, but It's
very hard for me to think of discarding even the most out-of-focus
family picture. I am just paralyzed on this project, not being able to
decide how to begin.)



-          Our own very large collection of pictures that we've
accumulated as a family-many treasured pictures are colored snapshots
that have yellowed. Some of them I mounted in those magnetic photo
albums before I knew better. Many others are in drawers waiting for me
to figure out how I want to handle them.



I'm sure ours isn't a unique situation, and I'm interested in what
others have done.



I appreciate any experience and suggestions you can share.



Ann Stewart



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



GenPhoto http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/
Post message: genphoto@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe:  genphoto-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:  genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE MAIL STOPS! ASK YAHOO ABOUT IT! NOT ME!
Please do not try to contact me at the Yahoo Groups list owner address, use
editor@...




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

    To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genphoto/

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
genphoto-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Like the rest of you I also have piles of photos along with piles of
other genealogical info. I found 2 different programs available to help
organize.
Bygones which is freeware
HYPERLINK
"http://home.utah-inter.net/bygones/"http://home.utah-inter.net/bygones/


Clooz
HYPERLINK "http://www.clooz.com/"http://www.clooz.com/

I tried Bygones and found it not very user friendly for my needs. But
the cost is nil and if you can figure it out I would guess it is a great
program.

I did purchase Clooz and have found it a very workable program to
organize photos. (and my other paperwork) You basically give a photo an
id # and then describe who is in the photo. As you add more photos you
link the persons in the pic. So when you run a report you can find that
you  have 5 pictures that have aunt Mary and maybe only 4 with uncle
Charley. You can add thumbnails to the database which also helps. You
also enter the location of the photo - ie: in the Smith binder or show
the electronic location (cd, hd, or memory stick)

I have no financial gains in either of these programs just thought
others might find these a good way to organize.

Arleen




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.4.0 - Release Date: 6/1/2005



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've been looking at scanners - amateur ones mind you - without thinking of
  the obvious - and I do now have a decent digital camera - Nikon Coolpix
7900
which has an excellent macro mode - I will have to experiment -

Suzanne


________________________________________________________________________
  Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 16:59:20 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
    From: "Suzanne" <a.s.hines@...>
Subject: Large negatives


   Could anyone suggest a scanner that I can use for large glass negatives -
largest 1 is approx 6in x 4in - thanks

Suzanne

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Message: 6
    Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 19:26:19 EDT
    From: HDMShort@...
Subject: My Mistake

Copy the large negatives on a light table with your digital camera and then
you can invert them in Photoshop Elements.
Sorry I left out the part about using a digital camera in my first reply.
Harry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]