On 6 Apr 2009, at 23:39:57 PDT, Kris Tilford wrote:
> >> On 6 Apr 2009, at 22:39:32 PDT, PETE wrote: >> >>> I have some old photos without negatives. I want to transfer them >>> to my mac without losing quality. (I sold my scanner several years >>> ago!). > > On Apr 7, 2009, at 1:06 AM, Ken Daggett wrote: > >> A scanner is the only reasonable way I know of. > > Another way is to photograph them with a digital camera. Not as easy > as the scanner for constant lighting, focus, etc, but it can work. > >> Buy a good one and get to work. > > I don't know about needing a "good one"? It seems to me that any old > scanner that you can make work with your computer will be good enough > quality unless you're needing special software bundled with high-end > scanners to remove artifacts, correct faded colors or focus, etc. > > I've bought USB scanners for between $2 and $10 total that can scan > 4,800 dpi (ppi). I haven't compared the "quality" of the output, but > somehow I imagine it's like .mp3 audio, I doubt the average person > could see the difference between an average scan and a good one (of > identical resolution & bit depth). > > One other thought, scanner output is typically gigantic files that > would need to be converted into some sort of compressed format, > whereas most digital cameras can generate a reasonably compressed file > immediately. The general rule-of-thumb I've heard is 200 pixels-per- > inch minimally, meaning if you had an original photo that was 8 x 10" > you'd need to be at 1,600 x 2,000 pixels minimally for the entire > image. Most scanners would be many, many multiples higher than this, > and you might want to dial down the quality of a scanner to get a > smaller output file, but if you were photographing the prints you'd > likely want to frame the image in nearer the highest quality available > on the camera. ---------------- Well, my "good one" is an Epson Perfection 3200 Pro that I got at a GoodWill Outlet for $5.00. It's main advantage is the software (downloaded from Epson) and you can scan at whatever resolution you want. It is FireWire and fast. I really don't believe, especially for any significant number, that I would enjoy photographing various sized photos with a digital camera. trying to hold them flat and square and getting good results would try my patience. The photos would most likely go back in the shoe box! Ken http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gt1w/stackomacs --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
