PDA

View Full Version : A family photo achival project - what do I need?




Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 03:42 AM
OK - I am buying an iMac next week. (Top end 27" model)

I have a project I want to work on over the next while. I have several thousand pictures I want to archive. They are family photos which go back to over 100 years ago. Most of them are 1970s onwards but quite a lot of earlier stuff. I have a mixture of prints (in various states of repair) as well as 35mm and 120 films.

What I want to do is restore these photos as well as I can. I want to scan, remove cracks, tears etc and also restore faded colours. I want these photos to be achievable at the highest quality.

What software do I need and what hardware do I need? I currently have a Samsung SCX-4825FN multifunction device. I have come to the conclusion the scanner on this will not be up to the task. I have considered buying a dedicated film scanner and have looked at this (http://plustek.com/uk/products/opticfilm-series/opticfilm-8200i-se/introduction.html). I have also considered buying a specialist flatbed for the prints that have no negatives (and for the 120s)

Software wise I have been considering Aperture. Will that do everything I need and is it the best bet? I have zero experience in this type of work. I am pretty IT savvy so I am happy to learn how to do things.



robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 03:50 AM
I'd break this down into a few steps

1) Capture. You will hate this. Sorry but that's the truth. I shoot some film and I hate the scanning phase. A single 36 exposure 35mm film can take a few hours to scan (:eek:). If you need to scan 120 films you are either looking at expensive pro-level film scanners or a flatbed. The scanner you linked to is 35mm only. I'd get on ebay and look for a used Epson v900. That's what I've got and I'm very happy with the results. I use Vuescan which I find works well

2) Repair. Depending on how rough your images are you may find that you don't need much here. If they are colour negative then the dust removal features of the scanner may work. Aperture might be usable for removing/fixing cracks and tears but I suspect you'll really want Photoshop or some sort of specialised tool

3) Enhancement and cataloguing. Aperture should be fine for this.

Doylem
Jun 8, 2012, 04:04 AM
Before you get recommendations for the hardware/software you will need for the job, can I suggest that you consider editing down this collection of images... from "several thousands" to, say, the best 250, if only to save your own sanity.

The task you envisage is enormous. How much time are you willing to devote to it? Consider a tightly-edited collection of pix, and how interesting this might be to future family members... rather than a rambling, endless archive of family snaps of variable quality.

robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 04:09 AM
I agree about being selective. There is no point scanning thousands of photos if you end up only looking at 20.

Also have you considered paying someone else to do the scanning. They could deliver you high resolution TIFFs so you could do your own repair/enhancement.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 04:15 AM
I agree about being selective. There is no point scanning thousands of photos if you end up only looking at 20.

Also have you considered paying someone else to do the scanning. They could deliver you high resolution TIFFs so you could do your own repair/enhancement.

I have thought about paying someone else to do it but the costs rocket.

I don't intend doing this over a bank holiday weekend - I appreciate it will be a long process. It will be something to occupy me over the next few years.

----------

I'd break this down into a few steps

1) Capture. You will hate this. Sorry but that's the truth. I shoot some film and I hate the scanning phase. A single 36 exposure 35mm film can take a few hours to scan (:eek:). If you need to scan 120 films you are either looking at expensive pro-level film scanners or a flatbed. The scanner you linked to is 35mm only. I'd get on ebay and look for a used Epson v900. That's what I've got and I'm very happy with the results. I use Vuescan which I find works well

2) Repair. Depending on how rough your images are you may find that you don't need much here. If they are colour negative then the dust removal features of the scanner may work. Aperture might be usable for removing/fixing cracks and tears but I suspect you'll really want Photoshop or some sort of specialised tool

3) Enhancement and cataloguing. Aperture should be fine for this.

1. When you say a couple of hours for a single 35mm film do you mean a complete roll or a single frame? I had been thinking about the plustek for the 35mm stuff and then selling it on EBAY to fund a flatbed for the rest.

2. Most of them are just going to be faded. There will only be a handful of older photos that need a lot of work. Can I do touchups in Photoshop Elements or similar and then import the photos into Aperture? Am I thinking about that all wrong?

robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 04:51 AM
1. When you say a couple of hours for a single 35mm film do you mean a complete roll or a single frame? I had been thinking about the plustek for the 35mm stuff and then selling it on EBAY to fund a flatbed for the rest.

2. Most of them are just going to be faded. There will only be a handful of older photos that need a lot of work. Can I do touchups in Photoshop Elements or similar and then import the photos into Aperture? Am I thinking about that all wrong?

1. A complete roll. But I am scanning each individual image one at a time. I preview the set of 4 strips and then crop to each image and scan. I find this gives the best colour balance at the end otherwise the software/scanner try and balance across all images which does not look as good. This is using a v900 and vuescan

2. Yes. You can even import them all to Aperture and set Elements as your external editor.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 04:55 AM
I can't see a v900 anywhere online. I have checked EBAY and zip.

Was that a better scanner than the current top end 750? Is there much of a difference? The v750 costs over 500 which is more than I ideally wanted to spend.

The v600 and v500 are available at a lot less. What sort of things would I lose out with going with one of those?

I have also been looking at the Canon 9000F which seems to get good reviews.

robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 05:04 AM
Sorry. I meant v700 rather than v900. The difference between the 700 and the 750 is reasonably minor, especially if you don't intend using the supplied software.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 05:19 AM
Sorry. I meant v700 rather than v900. The difference between the 700 and the 750 is reasonably minor, especially if you don't intend using the supplied software.

What about the differences between the 700 and the lower end 600 and 500? What am I missing at the lower end? There is quite a big difference in price.

robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 05:24 AM
The v700 and v750 were created to be the best possible flatbeds for photo and negative scanning. When I was looking into this last year they were still the best option for a flatbed despite being over 5 years old. The lower end scanners don't offer the same output image quality. If you are looking for archival quality I'd say the minimum you can consider is a v700. I'm sure lots of people would say no flatbed can really claim this and you need dedicated film scanners. But one that supports 120 film will be more than a v700 most likely.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 05:27 AM
If I am scanning with the v700 what sort of DPI should I scan at? Should I bother with Digital ICE?

robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 05:33 AM
If I am scanning with the v700 what sort of DPI should I scan at? Should I bother with Digital ICE?

I suggest you go and read some tutorials about this. It's not something that anyone can give a simple answer to. ICE, for example, does not work with some types of input (almost any B&W negative for example). As to resolution. It depends. It's tempting to say the absolute max with multi-pass as you are archiving...

Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 05:37 AM
Will do

joemod
Jun 8, 2012, 08:08 AM
I suggest you go and read some tutorials about this. It's not something that anyone can give a simple answer to. ICE, for example, does not work with some types of input (almost any B&W negative for example). As to resolution. It depends. It's tempting to say the absolute max with multi-pass as you are archiving...

Scanning at the absolute max dpi will create really large files(If I recall correctly hundreds of megabytes), while the optical output will not be better. Also the scanning time will be significantly larger.

robbieduncan
Jun 8, 2012, 08:21 AM
Scanning at the absolute max dpi will create really large files(If I recall correctly hundreds of megabytes), while the optical output will not be better. Also the scanning time will be significantly larger.

I agree. As I said it's tempting to blindly suggest this. The implication I was trying to make was that the obvious/simple answer is not likely to be correct and research will be required.

acearchie
Jun 8, 2012, 09:43 AM
Just thought I should add in that I scan 120 film using my Canon 8800f.

I have easily scanned 20mp plus with this. Normally I scan at something like 600dpi if it's a good photo (well good to me! :D)

Keebler
Jun 8, 2012, 10:52 AM
Hi Sue,

It's a task filled job, but very rewarding in the end.

1. As others have said, trim down your photos. You could do it as you go along as well. (ie. just take 1 photo of someone's birthday instead scanning more of the same event).

2. Epson scanners are great. V700 or V900 - fantastic.

3. Try to find a Nikon Coolscan 5000 if you can. It will do your negatives and filmstrips for 35mm (if you have filmstrips - so much better than paper for quality as the strips have probably been untouched so less dirt, nicks, scrapes etc.. on it). There's a higher end Nikon scanner as well which does larger negative formats.

4. Photoshop is your friend. Hands down should be your #1 priority. Simply the best for retouching.

5. A few books for retouching photographs - I bought Photographs - Restoration and Retouching by Katrina Eismann.

6. Wacom tablet. I used the medium size. Small one is really small. Using a mouse will take you a ridiculously longer time to edit any image. The Wacom has preset buttons to load common used keys (ie. contrast adjustment, retouching tools). Instead of my time being used looking at the keyboard, I'm looking at my images with my left hand on the presets and the pen in my right hand working incredibly fast.

7. Scan and store in TIFF format. I usually scan at 600 DPI on average. Sometimes 1200 if a client wants a larger print.

8. Use Adobe bridge to rename your files sequentially. Helps with organization - ie. for my current client, their albums are: Album 1 1976_001, Album 1 1976_002 etc..etc....

9. Scan your photos first then edit them. Copy your folders to another hard drive so you have a backup in case you screw up an image. Use Carbon Copy Cloner (it's free, but great to donate - fantastic app). You can back up a single folder. I use this and my client files are automatically backed up without me thinking about it.

10. Have fun.

You are right - it's expensive to hire someone to do this job b/c of the equipment you see above and as you'll find out, the time involved. I only do this if my clients are willing to pay and understand what it takes. In the end, it may seem like only images, but it takes a huge amount of effort and equipment to make it happen :)

Cheers,
Keebler

Sue De Nimes
Jun 8, 2012, 11:16 AM
Thanks for all those tips. A lot to digest! :)

How will I get on with Photoshop Elements rather than Photoshop? For a home project getting Photoshop and Nikon scanning equipment is really beyond the realms of affordability.

I am considering getting the EPSON v700 but even that at 400 is a bit of a stretch.

I think initially trimming things down will be the way forward but ultimately I do want to be able to scan everything.

Designer Dale
Jun 8, 2012, 12:42 PM
Photo editing and repair is a painstaking and complex process to do it right, especially if some of the photos are damaged. I never recommend PhotoShop for beginners simply because it's expensive, $700 USD, and has a very steep learning curve. Elements is something like $100 and should do the job of removing cracks, dust and scratches OK.

The extra most of the Epson flatbed mentioned by others is worth it. One tool for both the film and print scan needs. Other flatbeds are cheaper and come with film adapters but the Epson's are the only ones that will produce quality results.

Dale

Note: I spent an entire quarter of design classes just on photo repair in PhotoShop. Four days per week, three hours of instruction in the morning and three hours of lab in the afternoon.

joemod
Jun 8, 2012, 02:21 PM
Thanks to Acearchie who mentioned his scanner I found again the site which has good reviews on scanners. Check this (http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN1.HTM). It also has some good points concerning the dpi and the 3rd party scanning software.

Designer Dale
Jun 8, 2012, 02:32 PM
Something too keep in mind for a project like this is to name each file as it is scanned. Just running them through the scanner will give numerical file names that will only have to be changed later anyway. Think of it as the writing on the back of those photos in the family shoebox. People do still stuff photos in shoeboxes, don't they??

Dale

Dornblaser
Jun 8, 2012, 04:35 PM
I suggest that you talk to a local major photo retailer first. I recently did the same with a couple boxes of old pics that went back 100 + years. They did a better job with the scanning than I could as they had experience and professional scanners. I used PhotoShop afterwards were needed.

FWIW - I assume that you are following the iMac threads about a possible redesign/upgrade being announced next week/soon?

ChrisA
Jun 8, 2012, 04:56 PM
OK - I am buying an iMac next week. (Top end 27" model)

I have a project I want to work on over the next while. I have several thousand pictures I want to archive....


Lets say "several thousand" means 3,000 images. Scanning alone can take 4 to 5 minutes per image. So you are into a 200 hour job just to capture the images to disk. Figure restoration will go maybe 4 to 5 time slower.

The best way to do this is to send the entire job off to "Scan Cafe" and let them do it for you. They might charge you maybe $1,000. OK that is a lot but a good film scanner if you buy a used one is half that price and what is 200 hours of your time worth?

Everyone thinks the job will go faster. I will not. For every image you have to remove it from its container, place it in the scanner, wait for the scan, then enter a file name and hit "save", replace the photo back into the container. Then adjust the color, white balance and exposure in the image and almost 100% for sure remove some dust and minor defects. If you can do all that in five minutes you are doing well. Then just do it 2,999 times more and you will have finished only with the capture phase.

This is the outfit I use. Good price and good quality. Not "over night fast" but 100x faster than if you did this yourself
http://www.scancafe.com/pricing

What I do is divide the work up and send in a few hundred images at a time. When I get the DVDs back with the image files on them I import the entire batch to Apple's Aperture and send out the next batch. Then while waiting for the next batch to be scanned I enter the what Metadata I can on the first batch.

If you DO buy a scanner the one feature you absolutely need is the fourth IR color channel that is used to implement Kodak's dust removal process. All the higher-end scanner license this from Kodak and market it under different names. It works well. I'd say it can remove 80% to 90% of the scratches and dust from a negative or slide. A huge time saver. For most 35mm negatives and slides 3,000 DPI is more than enough to capture the film grain. That works out to 13.5 megapixels per image.

ChrisA
Jun 8, 2012, 05:51 PM
If I am scanning with the v700 what sort of DPI should I scan at? Should I bother with Digital ICE?

For most 35mm negatives and slides 3000 DPI will capture the film grain. Yes ICE works for color film scanning it will save you 10 or 15 minutes per frame. But ten with ICE you cn expect to spend some tie "dust busting" The best "dust buster" Ive found is the clone tool in Photoshop. Or maybe the "magic healing brush" on either case you really, really need a Wacom graphic tablet. If you do not already own Photoshop then buy the version of the Wacom tablet that has Photoshop elements bundled with it. It is like getting a free tablet for the price of Elements. NO, do NOT try and edit images like this with a mouse. Not unless you are good enough with a muse to sign your name with it and have it look like your signature.

Ruahrc
Jun 8, 2012, 11:54 PM
Lets say "several thousand" means 3,000 images. Scanning alone can take 4 to 5 minutes per image. So you are into a 200 hour job just to capture the images to disk. Figure restoration will go maybe 4 to 5 time slower.

The best way to do this is to send the entire job off to "Scan Cafe" and let them do it for you. They might charge you maybe $1,000. OK that is a lot but a good film scanner if you buy a used one is half that price and what is 200 hours of your time worth?

Everyone thinks the job will go faster. I will not. For every image you have to remove it from its container, place it in the scanner, wait for the scan, then enter a file name and hit "save", replace the photo back into the container. Then adjust the color, white balance and exposure in the image and almost 100% for sure remove some dust and minor defects. If you can do all that in five minutes you are doing well. Then just do it 2,999 times more and you will have finished only with the capture phase.

I would re-read this and carefully consider what you are proposing to undertake. I think a lot of people vastly underestimate the technical skill and equipment required to undertake a project like this and truly get high quality, "archival grade" results. ChrisA's 200hr estimate is also probably after the 50-100 hours you will spend upfront learning how to properly scan a slide for optimal data capture as well, not to mention time spent researching and finding and then buying a good quality negative scanner... (as I recall, you can only buy them used so you have to hunt sites like ebay to get them). The time investment begins to really add up, and unless you are super gung-ho about learning to scan yourself, you will ultimately be doing a lot of work yourself at a rate of just a couple dollars an hour vs. if you had paid a professional service to do it for you.

I also think a lot of people set out to do it themselves and by the end the result is either subpar because they didn't have the best equipment or technique, or they get burned out/bored and quit before they get through all their pictures.

Have a professional scan your slides for you, I believe there is at least one slide-scanning service out there that will scan all your slides for free, and you only choose and pay for the images you want to keep (they let you preview all the scans online, and then you pick the ones you want as full-res files), so you can discard all the junk slides and not have to worry about having paid to scan them only to ditch them later. Once you have the digital raw data captured at "archival grade" quality, then you can spend your years poking away at metadata, organization, restoration, and editing. IIRC the rates for these services was fairly economical considering the quality of their scans and time saved.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 10, 2012, 05:54 AM
This is the outfit I use. Good price and good quality. Not "over night fast" but 100x faster than if you did this yourself
http://www.scancafe.com/pricing


Thanks.

I am in the UK so any recommendations for UK based services will be gratefully received. The problem I am finding is I have a lot of 120 film which seems to be a LOT more expensive to scan.

These guys come up high on Google.

http://www.iphotoscanning.co.uk/photo-scanning-service-1/slides-negatives.html

They charge 1.99 per frame of 120 film. (That is the bulk price down from 2.99). I would say the bulk of the photos I want from the 70s and 80s are going to be 120. Even if there are just 1000 of them that means 2000 to scan. In US terms that is just over $3000!

Funnily enough Scancafe would be cheaper to use if I paid to ship from the UK to the US! I might drop them an email and see if they would deal with a UK customer. Pricing for this sort of work just seems so much better in the US

dlegend
Jun 10, 2012, 06:49 AM
Keep in mind, if you do scan them in by yourself you don't have to retouch every photo. If you do scan them in yourself I would scan them all in and then go through and pick out what you want to edit first, second, etc. and go from there.

acearchie
Jun 10, 2012, 03:25 PM
They charge 1.99 per frame of 120 film. (That is the bulk price down from 2.99). I would say the bulk of the photos I want from the 70s and 80s are going to be 120. Even if there are just 1000 of them that means 2000 to scan. In US terms that is just over $3000!

Funnily enough Scancafe would be cheaper to use if I paid to ship from the UK to the US! I might drop them an email and see if they would deal with a UK customer. Pricing for this sort of work just seems so much better in the US

Did you have a look at the 8800f that I have? One thing that you may not have considered is the enjoyment you may get from scanning the photo's in your self. I always really enjoy scanning in my rolls and retouching but I suppose I am only ever doing 12 or 24 at most at a time. But then, like you have said, you are not going to attempt to do it in one sitting and therefore might find some joy in the project especially if you are reliving your youth or your parents youth!

Sue De Nimes
Jun 11, 2012, 05:13 AM
Yes, I looked at it. From what I can make out the Epson scanners seem to be a better bet.

I am considering the v700 if I go down that road.

EDIT : I have been looking online and I see that the film I think we have a lot of is 110 not 120.

Certainly these films looked like this :

http://i.imgur.com/EJKFA.jpg

Does that have an impact on what I do? From what I can see online these sort of film will not give great results whatever I do. Is this something I should just scan myself or will I get a much better result from a scanning company. Also, will I get a better result scanning the negative or scanning a print?

carlgo
Jun 11, 2012, 10:33 AM
deleted by me. Let me rethink this...

Sue De Nimes
Jun 11, 2012, 10:35 AM
I have a Samsung SCX-4825FN (http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/print-solutions/print-solutions/mono-multi-function-products/SCX-4825FN/SEE) - click for the Samsung web page.

Will the scanner in that be any use for this project?

Designer Dale
Jun 11, 2012, 10:57 AM
I have a Samsung SCX-4825FN (http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/print-solutions/print-solutions/mono-multi-function-products/SCX-4825FN/SEE) - click for the Samsung web page.

Will the scanner in that be any use for this project?

Look for the terms "optical" and "effective or interpolated" when deciding on a scanner. Optical resolution is the max that the hardware can produce while effective is that signal run through a digital signal amplifier. The amplified signal is never as clean as the optical one.

I did a project similar to this as a design intern. I took an artist's slide portfolio and converted it into a searchable CD. I used a Nikon Coolscan for the slides and the results were great.

All in one scanners are ok for general use but they are lacking for specialized use like this. I have a wide format Epson 1400 printer and an Epson multi function. Both will print the cd/DVD labels I like to make, but the tray on the multi is so flimsy I've never even thought of using it.

Dale

Btw, 120 film is easy to identify. It's square.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 11, 2012, 11:07 AM
I am pretty sure now it is 110 film rather than 120.

:)

robbieduncan
Jun 11, 2012, 11:15 AM
Btw, 120 film is easy to identify. It's square.

Not necessarily. I've just bought a 645 camera that shoots 6x4.5 cm images on 120 film. And 6x7 was also popular.

Designer Dale
Jun 11, 2012, 11:52 AM
Not necessarily. I've just bought a 645 camera that shoots 6x4.5 cm images on 120 film. And 6x7 was also popular.

The width of the film may be the same, but 120 is still considered a square format. A 12 exposure 120 roll won't be the same length as a 12 exposure 645 roll. You could shoot a square frame format on 35mm film, but the result wouldn't be called a 35.

If you ordered a film holder for your 645 you wouldn't want to call it a 120. You would get a square one in the mail.

Dale

carlgo
Jun 11, 2012, 12:35 PM
Ok, rethought for better or worse...I have been through this and went through the same processes of wondering what to do. Finally got a family photo book printed (through Aperture) and it is great.

The problem is that you have found yourself to be responsible for saving all your family history and this is going to be expensive and time-consuming. Since your work may go down to many following generations, you want it to be good and not have your great-great-great grandchildren cursing you for sloppy work!

1. You have thousands of slides in 35mm and 110?

It is essential to go through them and brutally throw out the bad ones. Remember, future generations do not want to see 500 photos of Aunt Mary. A few that show her essence, a depiction of her life, is right. More photos than that and their eyes will glaze over.

2. Send out the keepers to ScanCafe or whoever. It is not worth scanning small format yourself!!!! I went for the high quality scan, but not the dust removal, etc. as you have to do so much correction on your computer anyway.

3. Every slide scan you keep to publish will need work. Aperture, Lightroom, Elements, etc are enough. You do not need Photoshop for this unless you are going well beyond normal restoration. I happen to have Aperture and it can do what photos need: cropping, straightening, retouching, saturation, color correction, sharpening, contrast...and the clone option works to remove creases, fix up borders and replace deteriorating. It also keeps a master photo in case you simply need to start over.

One nice thing about Aperture is that it preserves the original, so even if you make a mistake you can go back.

4. If you do have hundreds of 120 film/negatives, that is a problem financially. It will cost hundreds or thousands to send them out. These 120 or larger negatives/slides can be done on a quality flatbed. Bear in mind that nothing less than a V700 will do for slides and negatives! Don't think anything else will work well at all.

It is math at this point. If you have enough scans to do, then maybe find a used one and then resell it.

Just understand that you really need to send out 35, but you can do 120 at home. Cheapo 35mm scanners...no.

If you also have prints to scan, then the V500s and the like are great at reflective scanning and serve your general non-photo scanning needs as well.

Bear in mind that you cannot always make a bad photo perfect at all, just simply as good as it can be. As you do this, you get better at it and at making decisions about what is worth doing. Of course you will come across a few priceless old photos that you work on for hours because they are worth it.

As an end note, you will probably find that the really old photos, taken prior to the days of 35mm, are better. Photography was the mostly the avocation of professionals and dedicated amateurs. Each photo cost money, sometimes a lot of money, and they did not take 500 photos of a dog laying on its back. Almost all of the really old photos are keepers whereas only a small percentage of the small format photos are. And digital...probably a .05% keeper rate overall.

Sue De Nimes
Jun 11, 2012, 04:26 PM
It is 110 film I actually have. I spoke with Epson and they told me today NONE of their scanners will do 110 negatives.

monokakata
Jun 11, 2012, 07:01 PM
I'd like to add something about documentation.

Not long ago I found a box of negatives from when my folks were into photography -- this would have been in the fifties. The same box had many prints. Everybody who could help is dead. I have other family photographs, nineteenth century ones, with no possibility of learning who the people are. None.

So consider making it a priority to collect as much information about those photographs as you can. Something as simple as a voice recorder would work -- have people look at the images and talk about them. If you can use a little camcorder, even better.

But get something about them. Otherwise you could have a fine collection of images with no IDs and stories to go along with them.

And that would be a pity. Take it from me.

robbieduncan
Jun 12, 2012, 04:46 AM
The width of the film may be the same, but 120 is still considered a square format. A 12 exposure 120 roll won't be the same length as a 12 exposure 645 roll. You could shoot a square frame format on 35mm film, but the result wouldn't be called a 35.

If you ordered a film holder for your 645 you wouldn't want to call it a 120. You would get a square one in the mail.

Dale

Lets not take this way off topic (my fault, not yours). But there is no such thing as 12 exposure 120 film. All 120 film is the same length. You get more or less exposures depending on the format shot on it. So with the camera I Have you get 16 shots on a standard 120 film.

Sue De Nimes
Sep 16, 2012, 02:35 PM
OK - I got myself a Canon 9000F and I have started my scanning project.

I have a load of 110 negatives which I can scan in using a holder I managed to get my hands on. I have a load of 35mm negatives and also some 126 instamatic negatives.

I have the default Canon scanning software and also Silverfast 8 SE which came with it. The results on some of the small format stuff is actually OK - my expectations were pretty low.

I have been considering getting Vuescan - how good is the infrared correction on that compared to the other software?

philjo
Oct 29, 2012, 08:48 AM
I am planning a similar project during the winter.
I have got over 5000 35m B&W negatives which are all filed in albums and approx 3000 medium format negatives as well. These were all taken by my grandfather who had his own darkroom so he got through a lot of rolls of B&W film.

I have got A4 proof sheets with thumbnails of each frame on the roll so can hopefully reduce the number I need to scan but I might just go through them all and then do a high-res version of the ones I want to keep for enlargements.

I also have a load of 110 and 126 colour negatives that I took when I was younger.

My Epson flatbed scanner will probably do for the medium format but need a dedicated 35mm scanner for the 35mm negatives. I think the 126 ones should fit in the 35mm holders.
I did ask a couple of quotes for getting a firm to scan them for me but it was over 1 per medium format neg so total costs were approaching 5000 - which is not an option.

I'm currently looking at the Plustek models, unless I can nab a Minolta or Nikon one from ebay.

Regarding file names, I am planning to put the scans from each album into a separate folder using the frame numbers as the file name.
I'll then import them all into lightroom 4.2 which is running on my mac mini & apply keywording/collections to the images there.

snberk103
Oct 29, 2012, 10:51 AM
...
I have been considering getting Vuescan - how good is the infrared correction on that compared to the other software?

As you have probably figured out by now, Vuescan is a very powerful piece of software, that can be very frustrating to use because it has so many options for optimizing the scans. Just slog through the documentation, and make some time to scan a negative at different settings to see what works best. There is, iirc, the ability to save 'presets' so that you can save a scanning setup for a particular kind of film.

Keyword your photos as you import them into Aperture, and create albums as you go. That is to say... take the time to organize your images as you go, instead of waiting until they are all scanned in. Sometimes the container the film was in will give you clues about the origin of the images. Capture that info while it is still fresh in your mind. imho....

Make sure you are backing up as you go. Slow & cheap external hard drives are all you need.

Good Luck.

joelk2
Oct 31, 2012, 09:11 AM
not sure if this company would be of any use?

http://www.wescanphotos.co.uk/

prices seem alot cheaper than you quoted.