Best Scanner settings for old B&W photo scanning

[highpeakman]

I have searched the forum for this particular question but may have missed any old discussions as i cannot find a comment on the query I have. They are very basic questions for some of you but I don't have the experience to be the best judge.

 

I am currently scanning some old photos I took around Annesley in about 1963. They are rubbish quality from a cheap camera but they are still valuable to me and I do want to get the best quality print I can out of it. I have previously used my Canon 8400F scanner with reasonable results and am currently playing with a new Canon MG6650 which also seems quite good (although possibly not as good as the 8400F) but easier to use. I am looking at the results in Photoshop Elements 11. However I am not, nor ever was, a skilled photographer nor am I a skilled user of photographic software.

 

My question is really about the best settings for the scanning software. Do the best results come from setting the scanner to greyscale (which seems logical) or using by using the colour setting? I know that may sound odd but sometimes the illogical produces better results. I have tried both but not sure if I can see any differences at at first attempts.

 

I am using the highest resolution setting for scanning (currently 1200dpi) but sometimes on my older Canon this (and, I think, higher resolutions) resulted in curious "banding" effects. With poorer quality photos I am not sure if much is achieved by using higher resolutions? However should I revert to my Canon 8400F which was a really good scanner in its day and try for even higher resolutions as my current computer and software is much more capable (even if I am not!)  than when I used to get the previous problems.

 

I am currently using the Scangear software but perhaps I would be better off with an alternative?

 

Any guidance or suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

Don

[dasatcopthorne]

I have searched the forum for this particular question but may have missed any old discussions as i cannot find a comment on the query I have. They are very basic questions for some of you but I don't have the experience to be the best judge.

 

I am currently scanning some old photos I took around Annesley in about 1963. They are rubbish quality from a cheap camera but they are still valuable to me and I do want to get the best quality print I can out of it. I have previously used my Canon 8400F scanner with reasonable results and am currently playing with a new Canon MG6650 which also seems quite good (although possibly not as good as the 8400F) but easier to use. I am looking at the results in Photoshop Elements 11. However I am not, nor ever was, a skilled photographer nor am I a skilled user of photographic software.

 

My question is really about the best settings for the scanning software. Do the best results come from setting the scanner to greyscale (which seems logical) or using by using the colour setting? I know that may sound odd but sometimes the illogical produces better results. I have tried both but not sure if I can see any differences at at first attempts.

 

I am using the highest resolution setting for scanning (currently 1200dpi) but sometimes on my older Canon this (and, I think, higher resolutions) resulted in curious "banding" effects. With poorer quality photos I am not sure if much is achieved by using higher resolutions? However should I revert to my Canon 8400F which was a really good scanner in its day and try for even higher resolutions as my current computer and software is much more capable (even if I am not!)  than when I used to get the previous problems.

 

I am currently using the Scangear software but perhaps I would be better off with an alternative?

 

Any guidance or suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

Don

 

Try downloading  'Vuescan' from Ed Hamrick's site. There's a free trial.

 

Dave

[highpeakman]

Try downloading  'Vuescan' from Ed Hamrick's site. There's a free trial.

 

Dave

That looks very interesting. I wi9ll download and try.

Thank you.

[eastwestdivide]

Greyscale vs colour -

you'd have thought that greyscale would be more sensible, as colour will pick up any discoloration that a monochrome negative/print might have picked up over the years. As a secondary thought, greyscale will also result in smaller file sizes, as no colour info is stored. 

I've always used the greyscale settings for my B&W scans, assuming that the software and scanner developers know what they're talking about, but if anyone knows different...?

DPI settings -

Are these prints or negatives? Could you post an example of the "banding" effect that you mention? Sometimes you can get that (or what they call a "moiré" effect) when scanning something that's been printed using dots, like old newspaper pictures, and the dot pitch causes an interference effect with the dpi setting of the scanner. If it is that, try changing the dpi to something that's not an obvious multiple of the previous setting, e.g. change from 600 dpi to 700 dpi.

I'd have thought your 1200 dpi would be more than enough for prints, but possibly not enough for negatives (depends a bit on the size of the negative).

[Froxfield2012]

I usually scan (greyscale) at 300 dpi specifying that an original 2.25 inch square negative should "output" to 20inches square:  this creates an image about 6000 dots across:  more than enough for most purposes.  I use Silverfast scanning software on an Epson V700 flatbed scanner. You can see the results on the website in my signature.  I followed this approach after advice from one or two people hosting of professional websites and a magazine publisher.

 

However, you should be aware that there are others on this site who counsel scanning at much higher "resolution" or dpi.  Whilst I personally don't see what it achieves (given that the grain of most old negatives is coarser than the 300dpi result) their views should be respected:  and if it works for you then it is of course fine!

 

Prints inevitably (it seems to me) produce lower quality results to the extent that I wouldn't want to publish them on my website.  I have posted one or two around here as they were subjects of particular interest.  And I am not that impressed with the results from old colour slides:  not that the pixels show, it is just they don't seem as sharp as the larger formats!  And if the original ain't sharp then no amount of dpi will make it better.  Even Photoshop sharpening techniques don't produce that great an improvement.

 

Anyway, good luck and let us see the results (please).

 

Richard

[jonny777]

I use the colour settings for b/w scans, mainly because I like the ability to adjust the hue and saturation levels.

 

I know that sounds silly and I probably am a bit mental, but I find that I can tweak a little extra out of poor negatives this way.

[highpeakman]

Greyscale vs colour -

you'd have thought that greyscale would be more sensible, as colour will pick up any discoloration that a monochrome negative/print might have picked up over the years. As a secondary thought, greyscale will also result in smaller file sizes, as no colour info is stored. 

I've always used the greyscale settings for my B&W scans, assuming that the software and scanner developers know what they're talking about, but if anyone knows different...?

DPI settings -

Are these prints or negatives? Could you post an example of the "banding" effect that you mention? Sometimes you can get that (or what they call a "moiré" effect) when scanning something that's been printed using dots, like old newspaper pictures, and the dot pitch causes an interference effect with the dpi setting of the scanner. If it is that, try changing the dpi to something that's not an obvious multiple of the previous setting, e.g. change from 600 dpi to 700 dpi.

I'd have thought your 1200 dpi would be more than enough for prints, but possibly not enough for negatives (depends a bit on the size of the negative).

I fuly accept the comment that using greyscale should be more sensible but I am old enough to have learnt that while logic and "sensible" usually produces the best results there can be exceptions and some skilled people find solutions that do not follow convention. For that reason I just thought I would put the question out. Thanks for your comment though.

 

The question relates to old photos which are prints unfortunately. Small ones that were originally taken on a Brownie 127 so not high quality and they have not been treated particularly well over the last 50 years.

 

I think you are correct in that the banding problem I mentioned occurred when scanning negatives rather than prints. That was noticed a couple of years ago when using a different scanner - Canon 8400F. I have to set up this again to try again and will be doing that in the next few days.

 

I have a range of negative sizes plus some slides so I will have to get a bit organised and do some trials with different settings with each scanner for comparison. That will take a few days.

 

Thanks for responding.

[highpeakman]

I usually scan (greyscale) at 300 dpi specifying that an original 2.25 inch square negative should "output" to 20inches square:  this creates an image about 6000 dots across:  more than enough for most purposes.  I use Silverfast scanning software on an Epson V700 flatbed scanner. You can see the results on the website in my signature.  I followed this approach after advice from one or two people hosting of professional websites and a magazine publisher.

 

However, you should be aware that there are others on this site who counsel scanning at much higher "resolution" or dpi.  Whilst I personally don't see what it achieves (given that the grain of most old negatives is coarser than the 300dpi result) their views should be respected:  and if it works for you then it is of course fine!

 

Prints inevitably (it seems to me) produce lower quality results to the extent that I wouldn't want to publish them on my website.  I have posted one or two around here as they were subjects of particular interest.  And I am not that impressed with the results from old colour slides:  not that the pixels show, it is just they don't seem as sharp as the larger formats!  And if the original ain't sharp then no amount of dpi will make it better.  Even Photoshop sharpening techniques don't produce that great an improvement.

 

Anyway, good luck and let us see the results (please).

 

Richard

 

Well, there is certainly nothing wrong with your technique judging by your web site. Great pictures. Thank you.

 

I fully accept that negatives produce the best results but unfortunately sometimes the only pictures I have are either slides which have deteriorated or prints which have been battered over the years. These were pictures taken with "family" cameras - the resulting pictures were storted in the family home and not valued for a long time, never stored properly, and frequently lost - a familiar story for many I suspect. I have nothing that would begin to compare to the pictures you have published and I am aware of the considerable failings in my own but they do have a meaning to me and I am just trying to get the best out of what I have.

 

I can see that I am going to have to spend a few evenings experimenting. You have raised an interesting point in that I had naturally assumed that the highest resolution was best but I will now try a lower setting and compare the results. Thanks for commenting.

[highpeakman]

I use the colour settings for b/w scans, mainly because I like the ability to adjust the hue and saturation levels.

 

I know that sounds silly and I probably am a bit mental, but I find that I can tweak a little extra out of poor negatives this way.

 

Thanks. Interesting comment and I do not think it is silly. It is something I will try on some of my pictures to see what effect it has.

 

 

I suppose that I was aware the answer to my OP was really to play with settings until I came up with an answer that satisfied me but it has been interesting to see the techniques suggested here and i will certainly take them into account in the next few days.

 

Thanks to all for commenting.

[highpeakman]

Just played around for a few minutes to scan this from an old very small print - Brownie 127 shot - trying to use some advice from above.

 

I know it's still not a brilliant quality shot but it's nice to be able to rescue such memories from such a small old pic.

 

Coeur de Lion at Liverpool St but what year?

[highpeakman]

Just played around for a few minutes to scan this from an old very small print - Brownie 127 shot - trying to use some advice from above.

 

I know it's still not a brilliant quality shot but it's nice to be able to rescue such memories from such a small old pic.

 

Coeur de Lion at Liverpool St but what year?

Oops! Forgot to attach!

[eastwestdivide]

Not a bad result. Having a play with what you posted, it might well be possible to get more shadow detail out of your scan, possibly at the cost of some graininess.

Here's a before and after, probably taking it slightly too far. I just used Photoshop's Adjustments - Shadows/Highlights slider:

[highpeakman]

Not a bad result. Having a play with what you posted, it might well be possible to get more shadow detail out of your scan, possibly at the cost of some graininess.

Here's a before and after, probably taking it slightly too far. I just used Photoshop's Adjustments - Shadows/Highlights slider:

original.jpgboosted-shadow-detail.jpg

 

I am using Adobe Elements and I did try playing around with Shadows and lighting. As you suggest I tried to balance the lighting with the graininess, etc. I guess the final selection is a bit subjective and I have no photographic knowledge or real experience to use when choosing levels. Hopefully I will learn and get the best possible from these old photos. That is why I started this thread so any comments or suggestions are welcome.

 

I was genuinely amazed that the photo of the Brit drew a couple of "Like" comments especially from the likes of "DaveF" whose photos I admire greatly and show how it should be done to produce such interesting shots.

 

I do have a very limited number of these old photos and some slides which I keep unearthing and I will gradually scan them but not sure whether to post them or not as they are of a real eclective mixture and quality from the 60s. They vary from the West Country to Annesley and include steam, diesel and electric. Non are "classic" shots and often poorly composed and most of dubious quality but I suppose there might just be something of interest, who knows?

 

What do you think? If I do then should I post on this Forum or the Prototype Discussions Forum?

[eastwestdivide]

Whatever else you do, make some backups of the scans before you tinker with them too much. It's only a moment to restore a backup copy, but it's a pain to have to re-scan if your tinkering inadvertently loses something or messes it up completely. Gives you the confidence to tinker away at restoring something without being afraid of destroying it.

 

As for whether to post them up, only you can judge really - there does seem to be an unlimited appetite for shared pre-digital photos, especially if there's plenty of background interest, and more than just a full-frame shot of a loco.

[Froxfield2012]

Lots of interesting detail in the Britannia shot:  particularly the row of "train spotters" heads above the loco.  70007 was gone by June 1965 so it must date from before then!  And one might guess at quite some time before then given that 70007 looks so clean?

 

It Is good advice to work with a copy of the original scan.  It can save a lot of irritation.  Any blemishes to the print can often be removed in Photoshop (or Elements) working at 100% of scan size.  But it is a slow process:  allow 40 minutes to an hour per picture.

[stewartingram]

For what its worth, 70007 has the later tender crest. Originally a GE loco, when the Brits were displaced most/all of them went to March where I saw them stored (lived locally), I don't think they were used much there, before being transferred to the NW area (Crewe-Carlisle). 70007 was the 1st withdrawn, I posted a pic elsewhere on the forum of it after being cut up.

I reckon the date would be 1958-62 maximum, without consulting books.

 

Stewart

[highpeakman]

Whatever else you do, make some backups of the scans before you tinker with them too much. It's only a moment to restore a backup copy, but it's a pain to have to re-scan if your tinkering inadvertently loses something or messes it up completely. Gives you the confidence to tinker away at restoring something without being afraid of destroying it.

 

As for whether to post them up, only you can judge really - there does seem to be an unlimited appetite for shared pre-digital photos, especially if there's plenty of background interest, and more than just a full-frame shot of a loco.

 

Thanks. I always do ave an "original scan" before I try to improve it but Thanks for the advice.

 

I will probably try posting the odd picture and see how they are received.

[highpeakman]

For what its worth, 70007 has the later tender crest. Originally a GE loco, when the Brits were displaced most/all of them went to March where I saw them stored (lived locally), I don't think they were used much there, before being transferred to the NW area (Crewe-Carlisle). 70007 was the 1st withdrawn, I posted a pic elsewhere on the forum of it after being cut up.

I reckon the date would be 1958-62 maximum, without consulting books.

 

Stewart

 

Thanks Stewart

 

Your comments back up my own thoughts. I am aware that 70007 was mainly Norwich based during the above period followed by March (1963) before going NW. I used to go into Liverpool Street very occasionally, probably between 1959 and 1963, but not as late as 1965. As this was a Brownie shot it must be the earlier part of those dates. I do remember seeing a number of different Brits on my various visits but just cannot accurately place the dates and locos.

[highpeakman]

Lots of interesting detail in the Britannia shot:  particularly the row of "train spotters" heads above the loco.  70007 was gone by June 1965 so it must date from before then!  And one might guess at quite some time before then given that 70007 looks so clean?

 

It Is good advice to work with a copy of the original scan.  It can save a lot of irritation.  Any blemishes to the print can often be removed in Photoshop (or Elements) working at 100% of scan size.  But it is a slow process:  allow 40 minutes to an hour per picture.

 

Thanks for your comments. Yes, I liked the "train spotters".

 

As you say, it is a slow process!

 

I recently bought a new computer with quite a high spec i7 processor and lots of RAM with a view to doing this sort of work but it is still slow! (Relatively - on my old machine I would still be working on the first shot probably!). Hmmm. I can upgrade the machine but not my patience unfortunately!

 

However I will persevere!

[eastwestdivide]

I find it's the handling time for the initial scan which is the worst. And the computer doesn't really slow the editing process, it's more down to human decision-making and painstakingness (if that's a word).

[highpeakman]

I find it's the handling time for the initial scan which is the worst. And the computer doesn't really slow the editing process, it's more down to human decision-making and painstakingness (if that's a word).

 

You are absolutely right of course.

 

The machine did seem to be taking more time than I expected to think about and sort a couple of operations on some scans last night but generally I take your point . Probably most of the time comes down to me "Faffing" about. (my word for it).

 

As I mentioned though, I am going through a learning process so hopefully I will shortly decide the most suitable techniques for me and speed things up a bit. My photos though consist of prints, negs and slides and the latter two in particular will take some time to work through.

 

I did download VueScan so I have to play with that and learn it as well.

 

I must get myself more organised (tomorrow!).

[ParkeNd]

The concept of good quality scans and fast scans don't go hand in hand. Silverfast software went through a phase of offering multiple scans of 2, 4, 6, or 8 times but now does it in 2. I scan at 420 dpi with an output size of 12x8 using greyscale and absolutely none of the add ons like grain reduction, scratch reduction, or when in colour, colour recovery. No one has yet mentioned dialing in film brand and type or even ASA - you are missing out big time since the contrast curves of the film types are very different. I save the scans as TIFFs and then process in Aperture 3 using Curves, Definition, Recovery, Blackpoint, but never Shadows or Highlights. Go nowhere near Grain Reduction and Sharpen at 0.65. Film has grain!!

[EddieB]

For what its worth, 70007 has the later tender crest. Originally a GE loco, when the Brits were displaced most/all of them went to March where I saw them stored (lived locally), I don't think they were used much there, before being transferred to the NW area (Crewe-Carlisle). 70007 was the 1st withdrawn, I posted a pic elsewhere on the forum of it after being cut up.

I reckon the date would be 1958-62 maximum, without consulting books.

 

Stewart

Bit late to the party, but the RCTS book has 70007 receiving the new crest "by 09/59" and being transferred to March in 11/61, effectively narrowing the date of the snap to betwen these dates.