Old Photos

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>I have a collection of old photos and some of them date back to the 19th century. I have been thinking of getting a scanner and trying to restore them. The scanning world however seems to be quite complicated and not cheap. Would it be possible for me to photograph them with my very good f2.8 100mm macro Canon lens? Would not this be a quicker and even better way forward?</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Frederick, the good news is you don't need a very expensive scanner. In fact I have many scanners, and the one I use to scan old photos is a $30 Visioneer. All you need is a 300dpi flatbed scanner. You don't need one that will do transparencies, just reflective media (just about every flatbed). I would highly recommend an Epson or Canon. What is more important than anything is to have a good photo editing tool to fix tears and scratches.</p>

<p>And good for you for working on these old images. I think it is very important. I serve as our family archivist, and it's amazing how many images my relatives have tucked away. Sorry about the image I attached. It was scanned by my Visioneer scanner, but it is not the fully restored version.</p>

<p>I did try doing image copying with macro lenses, and the results were just not as good as scanning.</p>

[hal_b]

<p>I have had good results with even a kit lens. The only trouble is aligning the camera and the print, and then ensuring even light across the picture. Your results will depend on you technique more than your equipment.</p>

<p>That said, I believe you are correct that this way will be faster, but not necessarily better. You can get excellent results either way.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Michael - my thanks. You have a point. I have been meaning to salvage our family photos for many years but never quite got round to it. I would like to make some decent copies and then compile a scrap book with explanations of the photos and, hopefully, this can be handed down to future generations. It is criminal to see wads of old family photos being consigned to the bin. My children know very little of their ancestors and they should have access to the information plus some images. All the old photos I have are black and white and I even have some daguerotypes.<br>

I will look into scanning! Knowing who you are is largely about having an extended family and in our modern society this is rapidly disappearing. I have been a practising psychologist for 50 years and I have seen the collapse of the extended family and it is a disaster and responsible for many of the problems we face with young people.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Hal - my thanks to you. I must definitely do something. My father was born in the reign of Queen Victoria and enlisted in the army in 1914 when he was only 15. He served 4 years and managed to survive and I have photos of him in uniform and they must be preserved.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>I have just looked at Canon scanners and there seem to be a zillion! Am I right that if I scan a photo it is saved in a digital format and then I can work on it with CS2? </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Way back in 1972, Time-Life Books did a series called the "Life Library of Photography". The first edition of this was printed mostly in gravure, so the pictures are of extraordinary quality, about as close to original photos as you can get. The later edition was printed by cheaper means, and is not awful, but not up to the earlier version. The whole series is worthwhile, and used copies of individual volumes go for very little on Amazon, etc.<br>

I am telling you this, because one volume of the series is highly relevant to your query:<br>

<em>Caring for Photographs: Display, Storage, Restoration</em> .</p>

<p>This tells not only how you may preserve the originals, but also the information on restoration is still relevant, although today, you'll often be working digitally rather than in the darkroom. It has an extensive bibliography at the end of the book.</p><div></div>

[JAPster]

<p>"The scanning world however seems to be quite complicated and not cheap..."</p>

<p>You can acquire scan capability pretty cheaply if you shop around all your local thrift stores. It is not unusual to see name brand multi-function scanner-printer-copy-card reader units from makes like Epson, Canon, Lexmark, and HP. They might look a little dirty and beat up, but you can clean them with paper-towel dampened with isopropyl alcohol. Use glass cleaner to clean the glass scanner bed. In our area, these type units typically sell for $30-$50 and even less if you are there on a "half price" day. Just make sure the unit is not physically damaged in any way. Also, plug it in to a power outlet there at the store and make sure it turns on before you buy it.</p>

<p>If you buy a thrift store scanner you will need to locate the correct drivers for that particular make and model and for your computer's operating system. Usually you can go to the manufacturer's website, go to the support & Downloads pages, find the pages for that model and see if they list any drivers that match your OS. Download these to your PC and install them to the boot drive. That enables the OS to interface with the scanner at the low level. Reboot the PC after you install the scanner drivers to activate them into the OS.</p>

<p>You will also need a 'high level' application that supports scanner functions. The scanner manufacturer may also provide the appropriate high level scanner program for that model. Thats the program you actually run when you want to make scans. Again, search their website carefully to see if they offer a free download scanner app that is compatible with the model you purchase. If you see an app that looks appropriate, download it to your PC and install it. Make sure there are no erors. Then reboot the PC so that the app is completely installed on the local box.</p>

<p>Other imaging applications also offer scanner functions built in. If you are not able to locate the scanner app from the mfgr's website, try downloading the freeware program IRFANVIEW. This is a free download and easy install on any Windows box. I think you can use IRFANVIEW to access the scanner, activate a high-res scan of your picture, and then call it up into the IRFANVIEW workspace to look at it. (You may need to use more professional tools like Photo Shop or Lightview to do serious image restoration).<br>

So, you want to connect the scanner to the PC and turn it ON. Then boot the PC with the scanner turned ON so that the PC sees the scanner right away. Then download and install the appropriate drivers. Then download and install the scanner app so that the app can see the scanner as a TWAIN device. Then use either the mfgr supplied scanner app or a free program like IrfanView to access and control the scanner.</p>

<p>This approach is not totally free, you still have to buy the thriftstore scanner. But the drivers are free, and the scanner app is free. So you can go this route and still acquire a decent hi-res scanner for very reasonable prices.</p>

<p>Yes, you could also take a digital picture of each old photo. I think they call that 'copy work' (right?). In this approach, the LIGHTING is going to be critical. Try putting the picture flat on a table and mounting your camera on a tripod so that it looks straight down at the picture. You'll need two lights, one on each side, to the Left and to the Right, aiming at the picture at a 45 degree angle. That will evenly light the old photo. You will have to focus very carefully since the DOF is usually shallow in a macro lens. The better the lighting, the smaller the aperture you can use and the larger the working DOF. Try setting the lens 2 stops down from maximum aperture, since that might be the 'sweet spot' that will give you the sharpest results.</p>

<p>Make sure the White Balance setting on the camera is set correctly to match the type of lighting you use. That's important so that the colors of the old photograph are accurately rendered in the digital file. If the WB is not set correctly, the digital image will have an un-natural looking color cast that will flaw the picture.</p>

<p>You should also try using a 'hands off' technique on the camera to eliminate camera shake that would reduce your sharpness. Try using the Self-Timer function on your camera, and set it to 2 or 10 second delay. This allows you to trip the shutter and then take hand completely off before the camera actually takes the picture. This technique usually results in a sharp image (assuming you have good lighting, good exposure, and precise focusing) of stationary subjects.</p>

<p>Use the largest picture dimension that your camera will support, like Large Raw or Large TIFF. Avoid using JPEG for this type shot since you are going to take this image and use it as raw input to do serious photo restoration. A Jpeg file has already incurred a slight loss of image quality during the Jpeg compression. (For this type task, you are going to want to make the highest possible quality image up front w/o incurring any quality loss.)</p>

<p>You should be able to make pictures like this, as long as you take the time to set it up right, and take enough time to 'proof' the first batch of images. You may have to tweak and experiment a bit with the lights until you find the right settings.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>JDM and Alan - my thanks. Very helpful.</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>For the typical print produced by enlargement from 35mm (or smaller) film 300 dpi is suffice. If you have some prints that look to be finely detailed, they might be "contact prints", ie: produced by sandwiching the film with the print paper and exposing to light. With older prints this is very likely the norm.</p>

<p>With these contact prints more detail might be resolved by going up to 600 dpi. I would try different resolutions and compare.</p>

<p>Anyway, any cheap flatbed will do. I'd just read reviews as to which are popular, least problematic, etc.</p>

[JTG1]

<p>I would recommend finding a scanner that supports USB 2.0.</p>

<p>~Jack</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Again my thanks. Excellent advice.</p>

[mlynch]

<p>Having done a fair amount of this I do not recommend a flatbed scanner. Like some above, I'd suggest using your existing DSLR on a tripod with a reversible column, essentially make your tripod a copy stand. Find a room that gets plenty of natural light. Do your shooting near the middle of the day (or on a rainy day) and use plenty of bright reflective material to control shadows. I haven't found, except for the very smallest of photos, the 100mm macro as helpful as a 50mm "normal" lens. Shoot raw and correct for white balance. Use a cable or remote release and moderately low ISO, 200 to 320 works well and set the aperture at f8 or f11 if you can.</p>

<p>An alternative digital camera I particularly like for this type of work is the Canon G6 they have swivel screens and IR wireless remote. You can hang the camera upside down but swivel the display so you can see what you are doing from a comfortable position. You can probably get a very good deal on a G6 at KEH used. Caution, not all the G series have the adjustable display. More recently the G10 doesn't have the adjustable display, the G11 does. I'm not sure that the G11 has an IR remote.</p>

<p>The biggest reasons I have found not to use a flatbed are: 1) often the old paper base photos are curled and turn out to be very fragile, assuming you use the cover on the scanner, the act of closing the scanner can damage the photo. 2) if you do many metal backed photos, you'll quickly scratch the scanner glass. 3) shooting raw with an DSLR or with a G series canon will give you a far higher quality photo than most flatbeds, particularly if some degree of retouching is needed. Retouching a raw file can be done without losing information.<br /> Best of luck, this can be very fun and extremely rewarding.</p>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>I prefer to use a scanner rather than a camera with a copy stand. I have tried both. </p>

<p>A scanner such as the Epson 4490 will allow you to also do most negatives that you may find. I found a shoebox full of negatives from the 1940's. I also have a number of older negatives that look like a history of all the old film sizes Kodak ever produced.</p>

<p>You can use the software from the scanner manufacture or something like Vuescan. For the most part you can do a straight scan of prints. Save the scan as a Tiff file. Most any image editor can then be used. Most scans will need a levels adjust. This is a very simple adjustment and it is easy to see the effects.</p>

<p>Now you have a choice. How far do you want to go with your restorations? It is amazing what can be done to restore an old photo. The best books I have seen are by Katrin Eismann.</p>

<p>I am just getting back into my family photo project. I took a break after scanning hundreds of photos and negative. I just upgraded to PS CS4. Now I have to restore those photos that are worse for wear. I am lucky to have a brother who has done a wonderful job of researching our family. Then we just have to put the project all together.</p>

<p>Here is a photo of my great-great grandparents Henry D F Bergman and Minnie Heindorn. Both were born in Borstel, Hannover in 1845.</p><div></div>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Marc - that is a truly excellent photo and forms a real link with the past. Sadly even though I have quite a few photos like that I don't know who the people pictured are! My paternal side of the family was a travelling circus family and it would be very difficult to trace them. The need to have family roots seems to be coming back into fashion and when I see adopted children clinically they are desperate to discover their origins.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Having regard to all your advice I am thinking of buying a Canon CanoScan 8800F. I can get one from Amazon UK for about £145 and it has some bells and whistles that could be useful. I am hoping to scan unmounted and mounted 35mm colour slides plus old photos and more recent colour photos. Anyone know of this scanner?</p>

<h1 ><br /> </h1>

[ceesmaas]

<p>This one is scanned on a regular all round flatbed scanner (Epson Stylus DX4400) at 300 dpi.</p><div></div>

[ksenior]

<p>A friend suggested I use a steel plate with some small round magnets, to help hold photos flat for copying with DSLR. <br>

It occured to me to ask here if magnets could damage the camera if they were close together?</p>

[tony_leinster]

<p>I have very succesfully restored photos of my family by scanning with a £100 HP scanner and then working in Photoshop. I found getting the lighting right for taking photos of photos very tricky and got no better results that way. (Sorry about the two entries, how do you completely delete an entry!)</p>

[aladennis]

<p>My Dad was pretty anal retentive about labeling slides w/ names and dates and he also got people to give him info on old photos before they died so I have some good info to label photos with after I've scanned them. Now as a favor to future generations I use PS to place names and dates on some family snapshots that I think will be interesting in a hundred years. You young people are just like I was and think you'll remember all these shots. Trust me . You won't. Do yourself and your family a favor and label enuff stuff so names and dates won't be lost.</p>

[mlynch]

<p>Here is a shot done with the a DSLR and natural light using the technique I described above.</p>

[mlynch]

<p>Here is the damage that can be made worse by using a scanner and "flattening" the photo. The photo had see water and heat damage over the years. Large chunks of the photo were left on the glass.</p>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>You don't need to close the scanner top when scanning.</p>

<p>One thing to check on each photo is writing on the back. I always scan the back of photos if there is any writing.</p>

<p>Al gave a good tip on entering data along with the digital file. This can be done whether scanning or using a digital camera.</p>

<p>Frederick, whether you have the family names or not I am sure you could make an interesting family album. Contacting your living relatives and showing them the pictures can stir memories and you may find some information and perhaps more pictures.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Marc - sadly at my advanced age of decrepitude (76!) I don't seem to have any living relatives but I do think I should try to make some kind of record regardless. Your photo was super - lovely painted studio background and stilted poses. Probably quite a long exposure.<br>

I suspect DSLR or scanner is a matter of horses for courses. I can see both being useful.</p>

 

[mendel_leisk]

<blockquote>

<p>My Dad was pretty anal retentive about labeling slides</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Al, I think you're saying that in a positive way, but there's <em>got</em> to be a better choice of words, LOL.</p>