Epson scanning tips wanted

Blasted

Blasted

Suspended / Banned
Messages
927
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi there,

I've recently bought an Epson V500 and have my grandmas archive of negatives and prints. So before I get stuck into this monumental task are there any simple tips or tricks that I should know about? The last thing I need to do is re scan images. Its mainly an assortment of prints ranging from really old small black and whites to medium sized color. I'm not sure if I will do the negs just yet.

Thanks
 
If you can do the negs you'll end up with a much better final image. Also be aware before you start that it is a very time consuming (and some would say mind-numbingly dull) task.

I have only scanned one or two prints, usually for other people but the quality that you can get from a print, quite often dusty, creased and faded will be nowhere near as good as a neg scan, so I would sort through your prints and negs and match them up up and don't bother scanning the prints if you can help it.
 
Thanks, I appreciate that's its going to be a slow task, but its a great opportunity to get some copies of pictures that I may never get to see again.
 
Prints have one advantage (sometimes) in the form of notes on the back saying who, where or when. They will generally give a faded, low contrast image. As noted, negatives can give a much better result, although older negatives can also be severely damaged, with scratches, dust, fingerprints, fungus/mould, and adhesions from the packaging. Colour negatives have the problem of colour casts from the base emulsion; there are techniques for dealing with this, but it can be tricky.

All that said, it can be fantastically rewarding. I'm not sure it would be quite so much fun with grandma's photos rather than your own (younger self's); OTOH I'm quite keen to try to find some of my father's old negaives, as being early 20th C army he lived in some amazing places. To me, it's about the story of a life, and no, I didn't find it dull (it probably helps being a little bit OCD, but you wouldn't be in F&C without a bit of that, surely? :suspect:).
 
I had a quick look through some of the old prints and found a couple of my grandad from when he was out Hong Kong just after the war with the army. Its great seeing some of the older generations of the family as younger people.
 
Blasted said:
Hi there,

I've recently bought an Epson V500 and have my grandmas archive of negatives and prints. So before I get stuck into this monumental task are there any simple tips or tricks that I should know about? The last thing I need to do is re scan images. Its mainly an assortment of prints ranging from really old small black and whites to medium sized color. I'm not sure if I will do the negs just yet.

Thanks
Click to expand...

I've plenty of good results scanning prints even small ones, and it's the easiest way to go and even if your cant see detail on a print you can scan it and use Photoshop. And anyway not many people would know the difference between a result from scanning a neg or print, if they weren't along side each other.
 
I have noticed that there are some "purists" who will only ever scan a print and never a negative. I guess it's taking the digitalisation stage one step further from the point of image capture.
 
boliston said:
I have noticed that there are some "purists" who will only ever scan a print and never a negative. I guess it's taking the digitalisation stage one step further from the point of image capture.
Click to expand...

Personally I do not understand why anyone, purists or not, would scan a print rather than a negative unless the negative does not exist any more?
 
boliston said:
I have noticed that there are some "purists" who will only ever scan a print and never a negative. I guess it's taking the digitalisation stage one step further from the point of image capture.
Click to expand...

Am I missing something here? I don't think I know anyone who would scan a print rather than a negative.
 
RaglanSurf said:
Am I missing something here? I don't think I know anyone who would scan a print rather than a negative.
Click to expand...


Well I would if there were hundreds to do, and who cares as long as the results are clear...it's not for a competition. And I can post results from a very old Epson scanner before USB that many people would say "that's very good".
And scanning B\W negs is so boring and I found also they gave me the most problems with annoying grain.
And finally:- a good print will give you a good copy, scan an old neg covered in spots, scratches, grime, smoke or any other thing that causes deterioration is going to be a nightmare, so best to wash the neg first...yeah great if you have to do hundreds :lol:
 
Last edited:
But why would you compare scanning a scuzzy neg against a pristine print? It's hardly a likely scenario.

Ultimately, good scanners will get more information from a neg than they will from a print and I didn't say it wasn't boring and whats the problem with annoying grain? If it ****es you off that much why not stick to the bland and lifeless photography that's achievable from a point and shoot digital.
And also if you end up with an old print that's faded creased and tatty it will take you just as long to repair that in PP as it will to repair a scratched and grubby neg.

As for the time it takes, as you often point out you have plenty of time so what does it matter if you've got a hundred to do?
 
RaglanSurf said:
But why would you compare scanning a scuzzy neg against a pristine print? It's hardly a likely scenario.

Ultimately, good scanners will get more information from a neg than they will from a print and I didn't say it wasn't boring and whats the problem with annoying grain? If it ****es you off that much why not stick to the bland and lifeless photography that's achievable from a point and shoot digital.
And also if you end up with an old print that's faded creased and tatty it will take you just as long to repair that in PP as it will to repair a scratched and grubby neg.

As for the time it takes, as you often point out you have plenty of time so what does it matter if you've got a hundred to do?
Click to expand...

Well if you have a crappy print you have no choice but to scan the neg but I'm quite good at finding the easiest ways of doing things and scanning a print is easier than farting around with a neg, and you are forgetting the most important point and that is:- when he shows the results to his family or whoever they wont care how he did it...just a :clap:
note: old prints have been posted here and no one has asked any of us on how we did it. You can ask me now if you want, for my repeat post ;)

img398.jpg
 
I started out scanning prints, since all I had was an all-in-one printer-scanner. One example was my second car, a Ginetta G15 (taken in 1971 before leaving for Australia):

Ginetta_3.jpg


I went back later and scanned the negative, with the Plustek 7500i:

CN70A105a.jpg


Now there's no doubt that the second one lacks the obvious yellow cast of the first, and is much crisper. But I'm prety sure that blue is still wrong, due to the base film colour cast.

I could show some other examples of old mono negatives that have deteriorated so badly I wish I had the print to scan from!
 
Chris when you paste both images in Photoshop and correct there is not much in it the neg scan is slightly sharper...ok a pro are any of us would see the slight difference but about 4 billion of Joe public would accept either scans :)

On my small scanned print anyone would say it was a digital shot set on vivid ? I can't find the neg for some reason.

warwick3-1000px.jpg
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
Chris when you paste both images in Photoshop and correct there is not much in it the neg scan is slightly sharper...ok a pro are any of us would see the slight difference but about 4 billion of Joe public would accept either scans :)
Click to expand...

True enough, if you didn't have the comparison and had never seen the other you wouldn't worry.

OTOH this is F&C. Of course we worry about things like that.:wave:

On my small scanned print anyone would say it was a digital shot set on vivid ? I can't find the neg for some reason.
Click to expand...

That does look quite good. A bit less than 40 years old so a bit less yellow? :cuckoo:
 
ChrisR said:
That does look quite good. A bit less than 40 years old so a bit less yellow? :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Print is about 15 years old done by Boots (erm well the prints are in a Boots folder), what's annoying is I can't remember if it's a Etrs or 35mm Nikon shot (the negs are not in the folder with the prints)

IMG_9668.jpg
 
boliston said:
I have noticed that there are some "purists" who will only ever scan a print and never a negative. I guess it's taking the digitalisation stage one step further from the point of image capture.
Click to expand...

Never heard of this - "purists" always seems to go with negatives, rather than prints, and it would make sense since the print would be simply an interpretation of the negative (the RAW image, if you'd like).
Certainly never seen anything on APUG which suggested scanning a print - and discussion on scanning is all but disallowed at APUG anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top