Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Scanning - new lister

Expand Messages
  • AM
    Hello Steven and all, I have finally decided to start scanning photos for a web album for relatives (which I am going to burn on to cd s). BTW thanks for the
    Message 1 of 6 , May 8, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Steven and all,

      I have finally decided to start scanning photos for a web album for
      relatives (which I am going to 'burn' on to cd's). BTW thanks for the forum.
      I read some of the message archive, especially on scanning, and found them
      interesting reading.

      I have several hundred images consisting of;

      - Old black and white photos from about 1900 onward
      - Newer colour photos
      - Black and white photos of photos, and
      - A few photocopies of photos on normal laser printer paper

      My scanner is a Canon N650U (previously only used for photocopying
      documents) so my experience is very limited. A couple of questions if I
      may.
      a) If I set the output resolution at a specific figure when acquiring is
      there any way this can be overridden by other software? Can I be assured
      that the figure I set will not be changed. I see in PhotoStudio 2000 there
      is a field in the 'New' menu item for resolution.
      b) Also in the 'New' menu it refers to "24 bit true" and "8 bit gray". Could
      someone explain the difference for me please and when I would use either?

      I look forward to any specific responses or general comments - Thanks again
      Tony
    • E.Rodier
      Tony, I work with pixel size. Heads for genealogy box charts are usually 240-480 pixels high, snapshots for genealogy scrapbooks sorted by date or caption are
      Message 2 of 6 , May 8, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Tony,
        I work with pixel size. Heads for genealogy box charts are usually 240-480
        pixels high, snapshots for genealogy scrapbooks sorted by date or caption
        are 480-600 pixels. Web page pictures usually 640x480 pixels or smaller so
        that any visitor to a home page can see them quickly and without scrolling.
        Source documents might be 1024x768 or smaller.

        Currently using Windows XP "send to e-mail" to resize pictures. A 35mm film
        scan nearly 2 mb saved as JPG looks great as a 640x480 pixel 45 kb image
        sent to everyone except my Internet contact who uses Eudora for e-mail. All
        he gets is a screen full of numbers.

        The most common problem is that people try to follow directions for one-page
        high quality scans saved as uncompressed TIF when they need completely
        different directions to manage *sets* of family pictures saved as the most
        efficient standard JPG *after* editing.

        There isn't one setting suitable for a wide variety of pictures. Not
        familiar with PhotoStudio 2000, which company makes it?
        Elizabeth

        ----- Original Message -----
        > a) If I set the output resolution at a specific figure when acquiring is
        > there any way this can be overridden by other software? Can I be assured
        > that the figure I set will not be changed. I see in PhotoStudio 2000 there
        > is a field in the 'New' menu item for resolution.
        > b) Also in the 'New' menu it refers to "24 bit true" and "8 bit gray".
        Could
        > someone explain the difference for me please and when I would use either?
        > Tony
      • AM
        ... From: E.Rodier To: Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:27 AM Subject: Re: [genphoto] Scanning - new lister
        Message 3 of 6 , May 8, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "E.Rodier" <cerear@...>
          To: <genphoto@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:27 AM
          Subject: Re: [genphoto] Scanning - new lister


          > Tony,
          > I work with pixel size. Heads for genealogy box charts are usually 240-480
          > pixels high, snapshots for genealogy scrapbooks sorted by date or caption
          > are 480-600 pixels. Web page pictures usually 640x480 pixels or smaller so
          > that any visitor to a home page can see them quickly and without
          scrolling.
          > Source documents might be 1024x768 or smaller.
          >
          > Currently using Windows XP "send to e-mail" to resize pictures. A 35mm
          film
          > scan nearly 2 mb saved as JPG looks great as a 640x480 pixel 45 kb image
          > sent to everyone except my Internet contact who uses Eudora for e-mail.
          All
          > he gets is a screen full of numbers.
          >
          > The most common problem is that people try to follow directions for
          one-page
          > high quality scans saved as uncompressed TIF when they need completely
          > different directions to manage *sets* of family pictures saved as the most
          > efficient standard JPG *after* editing.
          >
          > There isn't one setting suitable for a wide variety of pictures. Not
          > familiar with PhotoStudio 2000, which company makes it?
          > Elizabeth

          Arcsoft. Operating system Win98SE.

          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > > a) If I set the output resolution at a specific figure when acquiring is
          > > there any way this can be overridden by other software? Can I be assured
          > > that the figure I set will not be changed. I see in PhotoStudio 2000
          there
          > > is a field in the 'New' menu item for resolution.
          > > b) Also in the 'New' menu it refers to "24 bit true" and "8 bit gray".
          > Could
          > > someone explain the difference for me please and when I would use
          either?
          > > Tony
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > 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@...
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        • E.Rodier
          Tony, Before starting a major scanning project, you might want to update your software and equipment. Any usable computer will do to learn scanning and image
          Message 4 of 6 , May 9, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Tony,
            Before starting a major scanning project, you might want to update your
            software and equipment. Any usable computer will do to learn scanning and
            image editing BUT it is a major challenge to switch software, backup methods
            and operating system after a collection has grown "too large" for the
            original computer.

            I lost the organization of more than 25,000 JPG images when a hard drive was
            moved from old to newer computer. With careful backups on CD-Recordables,
            I've never completely lost more than an hour or two of scanned images since
            March 1996.
            Elizabeth, using PaintShopPro 7.04 and Win XP Pro

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "AM" <imail64@...
            > Arcsoft. Operating system Win98SE.
          • AM
            ... From: E.Rodier To: Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 9:00 PM Subject: Re: [genphoto] Scanning - new lister
            Message 5 of 6 , May 9, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "E.Rodier" <cerear@...>
              To: <genphoto@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 9:00 PM
              Subject: Re: [genphoto] Scanning - new lister


              > Tony,
              > Before starting a major scanning project, you might want to update your
              > software and equipment. Any usable computer will do to learn scanning and
              > image editing BUT it is a major challenge to switch software, backup
              methods
              > and operating system after a collection has grown "too large" for the
              > original computer.

              I appreciate your comments. The PC I have should be okay ( later P3 and
              128mb of Ram, 20Gb Hd and CDRW) but I may have to look at the scanner and
              software issues before I start - particularly software. It's really a
              balance between what I can afford and doing a reasonably good job. I get the
              feeling there is quite a lot to learn.

              > I lost the organization of more than 25,000 JPG images when a hard drive
              was
              > moved from old to newer computer. With careful backups on CD-Recordables,
              > I've never completely lost more than an hour or two of scanned images
              since
              > March 1996.
              > Elizabeth, using PaintShopPro 7.04 and Win XP Pro

              I've just had a look at the PaintShopPro site and the product tour looks
              very interesting. Thanks for the help Elizabeth.
              Regards
              Tony

              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: "AM" <imail64@...
              > > Arcsoft. Operating system Win98SE.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > 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@...
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
            • Jackson
              In my last full time career, I helped install and develop a method for storage of massive amounts of data. The data collected in less than a hour would fill
              Message 6 of 6 , May 9, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                In my last full time career, I helped install and develop a method for
                storage of massive amounts of data. The data collected in less than a hour
                would fill over 500 disks each of 500 gigabytes. This required a form of
                new thinking, and for that job, a jukebox style of tape recorder was
                installed to handle the flow of data.

                Compared to that, the scanning of over 2000 slides, and thousands of
                pictures, some as old as those produced in the 1890s, or earlier, seemed to
                me to be easy. I was quickly informed by my equipment that this was not so.

                The time to scan a 8 by 10, black and white, 110 year old print, is much
                longer than one would think, as when we only scan one or two a day as a
                rule, we really do not think time. I have two file cabinets full to scan,
                so the old machine was a bit too slow. I have began to scan the prints at
                300 dpi, as a compromise, setting time against quality wanted, for the
                production of a book on a particular surname. For typesetting, about 150
                dpi seemed OK, but when working with older prints, and the time needed to
                touch up the scan to make clear printable offset pages, I found the larger
                dpi was frequently needed. As I only wanted to scan once for each print, I
                settled for the 300. I sometimes scan in color for B&W prints, when the
                print is yellowed greatly, and apply a filter to return it to B&W within
                the software. As a 67 year old, I may not get the project done before I
                die, but I am setting it up, for others to help.

                I have now set up a 1.7 gig Pentium 4 machine, with USB version two ports,
                and am looking for a fast home level scanner that will take full advantage
                of the power there. I have installed two 100 gig hard disks, with
                mirroring installed, so as to have two copies of each scan. This was the
                outcome of a fairly new disk going south in the middle of a week long
                scanning spree, while recovering from surgery. I had not gotten around to
                sending the files to the CDR to write on disks yet, so had to start
                over. Big lesson. I now write duplicate gold based CDs after each scanning
                session, to provide better retention of the data.

                I am using both tiff and low compression jpg files at present, on a test
                set of scans to try to see which I wish to keep. If I do tiff, the time
                factor is great, and storage is very large. The time I can do, the
                storage, is of set by the use of duplicate CDs, one set stored off
                site. The jpg is easier to use for most of those working with me, but in
                some cases, there is loss of data.

                I keep an duplicate set of all scans in the original scan form, on the CDs
                and never use these for work, working on copies only.

                This method works for me, but is expensive in equipment, and time, so is
                not good for all. I just wish I could afford a professional grade scanner.

                Shakey Jack
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.