Amidst all of the various discussions regarding photos/file formats and scanning issues I would add yet another wrinkle. If you have a digital camera with which you are comfortable and familiar you should feel free to take a digital photo of the photos you might otherwise scan. While there is absolutely no question that scanning a photo is a 'best bet' there are times particularly when dealing with a very old photo or one in somewhat less-than-prime" condition, that you would like to minimize the amount of handling of it. In this situation, a "new" photo of the photograph might be in order. This can be either on file or a digital image but both will offer a good bit of control over the final image with which you might have to work once in your computer. Most old photographs lack contrast and while you can add contrast in your computer programs it is occasionally at the expense of fine detail. I have found that nearly all black and white photos (brown-tones or sepias included) can definitely benefit from the use of a yellow (sometimes DARK YELLOW/ORANGE) filter ... something easily achieved when re-photographing but a bit hit or miss in the photo-program arena. Yellow filtration need not be by strictly using an "official" photo filter but may be obtained by using yellow gel material (from theatrical suppliers) yellow "cellophane" (from wrapping suppliers) ... just about anything which is clear and yellow and can be held in front of your lens. The subsequent photo will be markedly better balanced for subsequent computer manipulation than a direct scan of the original and you have another copy that can be handled while the precious original can be physically archived. As for file formats: TIFF (Tagged Image File Format) is, without question, the best all around format PROVIDING you save your original scan (or download) as a TIFF directly. If you cannot save your first effort as a TIFF format then, candidly, it doesn't really matter. JPG is a perfectly acceptable format which allows a great deal of flexibility in terms of compression vs. quality in most photo/graphics programs. BMP is a great graphics format but most particularly where combinations of text and graphics are involved. For photographic use (strictly speaking) it is too coarse" ... that is it provides only "adequate" resolution but at the expense of a fairly large amount of filespace. GIF is a great format ... sort of somewhere between BMP and JPG (low ratio) ... but there continue to be licensing issues with GIF and many programs don't allow for the full utilization of this format for this reason. From a standpoint of "interchangeability" and 'distribute-ability' JPG wins, hands down. Plus it's a very small (compared to TIFF) file ... hmmm... guess that's got something to do with its "distribute-ability!" Don't know if this helps but it's another point of departure ... Representing my two cents... Scott Carlton -------Original Message------- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, November 08, 2002 03:46:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Picture Question There is a good explanation on tiff, jpg, gif, png and many graphic-formats on http://www.scantips.com/basics09.html. The site also gives a very good explanation on screen- and printer-resolutions (gives you the answer on why pictures, which seem okay on screen, become very small when printed!). See the different chapters on: http://www.scantips.com. Wim Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
