Old Photos

[jtk]

<p>A middling quality flatbed will outresolve the lens, and no, you won't scratch the glass or destroy the original print unless you're careless. </p>

<p>Using a long-discontinued Epson 3200 I've scanned hundreds of 19th century prints (and 19th century negs (it's very good with those big old negs...they inkjet print beautifully, since an inkjet printer is higher resolution than any enlarger)</p>

<p>Tintypes call for some fooling around with lighting...the camera may be better for them. A typical tintype is very sharp and, when copied (film or <em>maybe</em> scanned) can print beautifully to a larger size. 2X has been easy.</p>

 

[pcnilssen]

<p>Frederick, good luck with your project. Based on my own experience, scanning takes a h*** of a long time, but is very, very fun.</p>

[jtk]

<p>If you're careless you'll have things come apart in the scanner. If you're careless you'll have lighting troubles with cameras. If your goal is photolab prints, your best course of action is probably camera. If you're after better results in the end, scan for yourself and print for yourself.</p>

[chelsea]

<p>This is motivating me to get back to my own family photo project.  My father is from Germany, has some pictures of his family, home town, when he was home on leave from the army, etc.  I started scanning so that both my brother and I can have copies. What I've done with the enlargements is made the canvas size larger, and added a text description at the bottom.  When Dad's gone no one will know who is in the picture  and where and when they were taken.<br>

 <br>

My aunt had sent photos a few years back of my grandparents' and great grandparents' 50th Anniversaries, there was a whole crowd of people in each of the photos.  These were 4x6 photos, I scanned them at 600 dpi, enlarged them to 8x10, sharpened and tweaked, and printed them off.  I sent my aunt 2 copies, one glossy print for her to keep, a second matte print with all the faces numbered.  We asked her if she knew who the people were and how they were related to us.  Back came an envelope 2 months later, she had lists of EVERY single person in those photos, one of the men in the photos was my great-great-grandfather.    5 months later my aunt passed away.  If we had not asked her, we would have never found out the names, and a part of our personal history would have been lost.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Rose-Marie - it is very important to have a family history. It's how we know who we are. Well done.</p>

[pcnilssen]

<p>Rose-Marie,<br>

very wisely done. Often we forget to ask until it is too late.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

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

</blockquote>

<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>

</blockquote>

<p>I have never understood why that means what it's supposed to mean.</p>

[frederick_stevens1]

<p>Ah! You need to discuss this with a psychologist. It should be 'anally retentive' and the idea was from Freud. It was a work of genius for him to see that the obsessional was 'anal' and it all dated back to early toilet training. You can have two kinds of obsessional - the anal retentive (neat, orderly) and the anal expulsive (untidy and chaotic). There is a genetic component and, sadly, the obsessional is quite untreatable. I have seen many of them over the years and I have never managed to 'cure' one of them. It is a waste of clinic time even to see them. I used to advise staff to see them twice, argue with them twice and then stick 'em on a 6 month review. They really suffer from a severe anxiety neurosis and they are very risk averse. I knew one man who would stay in bed all day! There are different levels of severity - labelling slides may not be obsessional! It may just be sensible. I should do it myself.</p>