Beginner requesting help

Beginner requesting help

Post by sneakybo » Fri, 11 Oct 2002 07:08:09



This newbie to scanners would like to know:

In general, how much work is involved in making a scanned picture look like
the original? I don't mean airbrushing girlie pics or detailing individual
pixels in a 1900 x 1200 monster. I just mean adjusting colors in a casual
family photo (from an Olympus Stylus Elite) so that they look halfway
recognizable.

Is there anything about scanners that determines the time and/or effort
required to match? I have access to a new Epson 1650 Perfection Photo
Scanner, and I was hoping that the process would be more automatic.
Unfortunately, the adjustable settings didn't get me anywhere near the
target after an hour of sweating. If I've got 120-200 pictures and a limited
schedule, something like 5-15 minutes tops per would be ideal.

My last post in a scanner-related newsgroup resulted in a single reply,
which said that my problem was likely not knowing how to calibrate my
monitor properly. I couldn't tell if that was contempt or something else...

Thanks in advance for useful pointers.

 
 
 

Beginner requesting help

Post by Godfrey DiGiorg » Fri, 11 Oct 2002 07:40:27


[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
   the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]

Amount of effort required to make good digital images from scanned
photographs varies a lot. It depends on:

- quality of the original
- quality of the scanner
- quality of the scanning application
- scan settings
- quality of the image processing/editing program used
- skill of the operator

In general, once you have enough time spent using a scanner/scan
application/image processing application, you will find that you can
get a "close" or "acceptable" scan pretty quickly. Getting a
"presentation quality" scan prepped for printing will likely take much
more time.

See Wayne Fulton's excellent website <http://www.scantips.com/> for a
primer on scanning technology and techniques. That should help you
along the learning curve quickly.

Godfrey

In article


> This newbie to scanners would like to know:

> In general, how much work is involved in making a scanned picture look like
> the original? I don't mean airbrushing girlie pics or detailing individual
> pixels in a 1900 x 1200 monster. I just mean adjusting colors in a casual
> family photo (from an Olympus Stylus Elite) so that they look halfway
> recognizable.

> Is there anything about scanners that determines the time and/or effort
> required to match? I have access to a new Epson 1650 Perfection Photo
> Scanner, and I was hoping that the process would be more automatic.
> Unfortunately, the adjustable settings didn't get me anywhere near the
> target after an hour of sweating. If I've got 120-200 pictures and a limited
> schedule, something like 5-15 minutes tops per would be ideal.

> My last post in a scanner-related newsgroup resulted in a single reply,
> which said that my problem was likely not knowing how to calibrate my
> monitor properly. I couldn't tell if that was contempt or something else...

> Thanks in advance for useful pointers.


 
 
 

Beginner requesting help

Post by Skk » Fri, 11 Oct 2002 12:46:55


Hello,

Quote:> In general, how much work is involved in making a scanned picture look like
> the original? I don't mean airbrushing girlie pics or detailing individual
> pixels in a 1900 x 1200 monster. I just mean adjusting colors in a casual
> family photo (from an Olympus Stylus Elite) so that they look halfway
> recognizable.

My experience scanning regular old family pictures results in images
that are a shade darker then the originals, so check the
brightness/contrast settings in your image editing program.  Once you
determine your scan settings and the bright/contrast setting that
compliment one another you'll have a more automatic process for
working through those 120+ pics.

Quote:> Is there anything about scanners that determines the time and/or effort
> required to match? I have access to a new Epson 1650 Perfection Photo
> Scanner, and I was hoping that the process would be more automatic.
> Unfortunately, the adjustable settings didn't get me anywhere near the
> target after an hour of sweating. If I've got 120-200 pictures and a limited
> schedule, something like 5-15 minutes tops per would be ideal.

Definetly there are a lot of different scanners and settings... the
actual amount of time you are spending scanning per image is related
to the dpi you're scanning at.  (100 dpi is noticeably faster then 400
or 600 dpi.)  If you're scanning at 600 dpi and plan to create an
online photo album you're wasting a lot of time.  Online images should
be <100 dpi; decent image, fast loads.  On the other hand, if you're
planning to blow up Aunt Mae to poster size for her 80th birthday
party you'll want a high resolution scan to begin with.  So the
question is not "Is there anything about scanners that determines the
time and/or effort required", it should be "Is there anything about
the 'output' that determines time, etc.".  Say you're transferring
these 120+ images from hardcopy to a CD for posterity's sake, then,
200 dpi is plenty.  If you're planning to print them do a test at 300,
600 & the highest scan option you have available to you, and then
print each image on the type of paper you'll be using (plain,
cardstock, photo quality, etc).  Seeing each option will give you a
pretty clear idea of time investment vs. output.

Hope this helps.

 
 
 

Beginner requesting help

Post by jdun » Sun, 13 Oct 2002 07:21:32


My advice differs a little from the other two posts. I have retouched &
restored several B&W photos from before 1900 (among many others). If the
original has faded or is moldy or otherwise damaged, it may require
hours of patient work. Some times you must experiment a little.
On the whole, most people tell me that I have achieved remarkable
results from very marginal originals. Some times I make multiple scans
and combine them. When working with very old originals that are
deteroriating daily, I recomend that you scan them a little higher than
what you'd ordinarily want. In the future, you should expect the
technology to get better, and who knows, you may want the higher res
scan. Worst case you can always go down in resolution, but going up is
always a problem. The price is a little more storage size and scan time.

> This newbie to scanners would like to know:

> In general, how much work is involved in making a scanned picture look like
> the original? I don't mean airbrushing girlie pics or detailing individual
> pixels in a 1900 x 1200 monster. I just mean adjusting colors in a casual
> family photo (from an Olympus Stylus Elite) so that they look halfway
> recognizable.

> Is there anything about scanners that determines the time and/or effort
> required to match? I have access to a new Epson 1650 Perfection Photo
> Scanner, and I was hoping that the process would be more automatic.
> Unfortunately, the adjustable settings didn't get me anywhere near the
> target after an hour of sweating. If I've got 120-200 pictures and a limited
> schedule, something like 5-15 minutes tops per would be ideal.

> My last post in a scanner-related newsgroup resulted in a single reply,
> which said that my problem was likely not knowing how to calibrate my
> monitor properly. I couldn't tell if that was contempt or something else...

> Thanks in advance for useful pointers.

 
 
 

Beginner requesting help

Post by sneakybo » Sun, 13 Oct 2002 07:03:33


My thanks to all respondents for their replies - three so far. I guess there
is no easy AND quick answer - just have to experiment, huh?

I gather that even for one scanner, different photos can demand different
combinations of settings adjustments....

 
 
 

Beginner requesting help

Post by Tom Harriso » Mon, 14 Oct 2002 10:23:53


Yeah, really two things:
1) learning how to scan to get the right results in different situations
2) doing the scan and using the skills learned in item 1.

It's a lot of work, and IMHO only a fool would do it, which explains why I
do, for example :-)

Tom


Quote:> My thanks to all respondents for their replies - three so far. I guess
there
> is no easy AND quick answer - just have to experiment, huh?

> I gather that even for one scanner, different photos can demand different
> combinations of settings adjustments....

 
 
 

1. Absolute beginner FS98 - Help requested

Hi,
I just downloaded FS98 onto my hard drive.  I am a beginner in the
truest sense.  I have a capable computer and a Sidewinder Precision Pro
joystick which operates correctly.
Where do I begin?  How do I learn this complicated simulator in the most
orderly fashion?  Do I do the lesson flights first or do I read and
familiarize with the aircraft and ground school?  I'm not an idiot but
it does seem a little mind boggling.  Any advice that experienced users
could or would give me would be greatly appreciated.  I thank everyone
for their time.

Dave

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

2. Hard Drive Backup

3. Beginners Book for Lotus 2.x recommendations requested

4. folder component in scan format

5. Request for Comment: Book "Robot Building for Beginners"

6. 900 MHz Update: Lucent 9510

7. Beginner requesting advice on best Microcontroller to start experimenting with

8. International Company needs people urgent!!!

9. info request from beginner

10. latex to pdf -- beginner level info requested

11. anyone out there to help me plz?very urgent help requested

12. Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED - Beginners help.

13. help a complete beginner!