Malcom - about 3 years ago my wife gathered up existing portraits of her step-mother Audrey and spread them around the house to be viewed by guests at the 95th birthday party we put on for Audrey. Some family snaps, some studio shots. The images started with Audrey at 3 months in 1917 and continued on through the early 1960s. I subsequently scanned those, put them into a Blurb book, copies of which we sent to several family members who might want such a family “scrapbook.” I scanned using the Epson V600 and found it quite pleasant to use; not terribly slow, decent quality, etc. Many of the photos had annotations on the backside; I scanned those as well and included those images in the book as captions for the photos.
I love the flexibility I have via Blurb or others of its ilk to be able to create multiple copies of a photo scrapbook! And even though these of Audrey were fairly decent shape and didn’t require much post processing, it was nice to be able to enhance contrast, etc. to bring out details from the original prints. I didn’t give much thought to the possibility that the original studios would still be in business after 70-95 years and in most cases the studio wasn’t identified on the print or frame. So I basically ignored whatever copyright issues might have obtained. I have also played with scanning some early B&W prints from my own youth. These are not in good condition, with curling a major issue. One tip for dealing with this: removable double-sided cello tape, aka Artists’ Tape, to attach the offending photo to a backing before scanning. stan On Jan 21, 2015, at 3:29 PM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Jan 21, 2015, at 12:40 PM, Malcolm Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Paul Stenquist wrote: >> >>> All of the prints for this article were scanned on my Epson V500. And >>> it’s not even the top of the Epson line. Epson flatbeds are excellent. >>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/79914167/That%20Kid%20From%20Chicag >>> o.pdf >> >> Great article too, I love the 66/67 Charger in particular. >> >> Can the Epson deal with underexposed negatives or transparencies? > > Definitely. Some of these pics were not very good, but the scanner picked up > what little was there and then I was able to enhance it in PhotoShop. It can > even do more. Our 43-year old wedding photos were almost completely ruined. A > lousy photographer and crappy lab had done our original wedding book. The > pics faded and turned green. I scanned them all on the Epson using the > scanning software’s restore function, then further enhanced them in > PhotoShop. They came out looking like new. I printed them all and made my > wife a new book for her birthday. >> I have a number I took in the late '70s (just before I bought my first >> Pentax) that have the detail there, but you need to compensate to bring the >> detail out. I expected to convert them to a digital image with a DSLR, >> simply because I could play about with exposure etc. I'd like to do as much >> as possible in camera/scanner before post-processing. >> >> Malcolm >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
