Newbie question: Scanner recommendations - I have inherite..

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo,comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

The negatives and photos I inherited come from the period between the 1920s
to early 1960s and are black and white. There are a mixture of sizes in
both the negatives and the photos.

One lot of negatives are 7cm by 4cm (2.75 by about 1.5 inches) with two
pictures on each of this sized negative. The other size is 6cms by 6.15cms
(2 by 2.25 inches) with one picture on the negative. There are a number of
negatives which have been taken at night and have "120 or B20" written on
the folder they're in.

The photos include a range of sizes from 4cm by 3cm (1.5 inches by less than
1.25 inches) and 3.5cms by 4.25 cms (1.5 by 1.75 inches) to the large family
portraits eg 21cms by 16cms (8.5 by 6.5 inches) or larger. These are all
black and white. They appear to be in pretty good condition, have been in
original camera shop envelopes and most aren't badly marked or creased.

Apart from scanning those I also want to scan the family photos I've taken
over the years or been sent by other family members. This includes a couple
of thousand negatives or photos from the late 1960s on in a mixture of black
and white and colour.

I've never used a scanner for this sort or amount of work before.
Recommendations on the best scanner to handle this task appreciated. By
best scanner I'm thinking of ease of use for scanning multiple small
negatives and photos and a reasonable quality output which won't require too
much fiddling. I've looked at a couple of scanners with inbuilt negative
handlers and am wondering how well these work. Would they be suitable for
the older style negatives and mixed sizes I have? I would like to scan
multiple negatives or photos at once so I don't spend the next 10 years of
my spare time scanning. Is this possible and if yes, what equipment do I
need to manage this?

I would also appreciate any tips about best handling this amount of work ie.
how best to set the scanner up for this, do I want highest level quality
scanning or am I likely to take much less time for a reasonable output if
I'm not too fussy. What sorts of differences will I get in the scanned
material with this approach? I have both Photoshop vs 7 and MGI photsuite
vs 8.05 - haven't used either of these previously which one of these is best
for working with the scanned photos/negatives?


Thanks all

Anne
7 answers Last reply
More about newbie question scanner recommendations inherite
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    "awhiteford" <awhitefo@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
    news:jINud.69383$K7.22492@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > The negatives and photos I inherited come from the period between the
    1920s
    > to early 1960s and are black and white. There are a mixture of sizes in
    > both the negatives and the photos.
    >
    > One lot of negatives are 7cm by 4cm (2.75 by about 1.5 inches) with two
    > pictures on each of this sized negative. The other size is 6cms by
    6.15cms
    > (2 by 2.25 inches) with one picture on the negative. There are a number
    of
    > negatives which have been taken at night and have "120 or B20" written on
    > the folder they're in.
    >
    > The photos include a range of sizes from 4cm by 3cm (1.5 inches by less
    than
    > 1.25 inches) and 3.5cms by 4.25 cms (1.5 by 1.75 inches) to the large
    family
    > portraits eg 21cms by 16cms (8.5 by 6.5 inches) or larger. These are all
    > black and white. They appear to be in pretty good condition, have been in
    > original camera shop envelopes and most aren't badly marked or creased.
    >
    > Apart from scanning those I also want to scan the family photos I've taken
    > over the years or been sent by other family members. This includes a
    couple
    > of thousand negatives or photos from the late 1960s on in a mixture of
    black
    > and white and colour.
    >
    > I've never used a scanner for this sort or amount of work before.
    > Recommendations on the best scanner to handle this task appreciated. By
    > best scanner I'm thinking of ease of use for scanning multiple small
    > negatives and photos and a reasonable quality output which won't require
    too
    > much fiddling. I've looked at a couple of scanners with inbuilt negative
    > handlers and am wondering how well these work. Would they be suitable for
    > the older style negatives and mixed sizes I have? I would like to scan
    > multiple negatives or photos at once so I don't spend the next 10 years of
    > my spare time scanning. Is this possible and if yes, what equipment do I
    > need to manage this?
    >
    > I would also appreciate any tips about best handling this amount of work
    ie.
    > how best to set the scanner up for this, do I want highest level quality
    > scanning or am I likely to take much less time for a reasonable output if
    > I'm not too fussy. What sorts of differences will I get in the scanned
    > material with this approach? I have both Photoshop vs 7 and MGI
    photsuite
    > vs 8.05 - haven't used either of these previously which one of these is
    best
    > for working with the scanned photos/negatives?
    >
    >
    > Thanks all
    >
    > Anne
    >
    Hi Anne,

    Considering you need to scan 1000s of negative you should consider a proper
    film scanner.

    Not cheap but apparently pretty good is the Nikon CoolScan 8000ED.
    http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/scanner/scoolscan_8000_ed/index.htm

    Some reviews at -
    http://www.nikonlinks.com/equipment_scanners.htm#8000

    Cheers,
    Alan
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    "Alan Rutlidge .iinet.net.au>" <rutlidge@<No_Spam> wrote in message
    news:41bc2a96$0$14481$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

    > Hi Anne,
    >
    > Considering you need to scan 1000s of negative you should consider a
    proper
    > film scanner.
    >
    > Not cheap but apparently pretty good is the Nikon CoolScan 8000ED.
    >
    http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/scanner/scoolscan_8000_ed/index.htm
    >
    > Some reviews at -
    > http://www.nikonlinks.com/equipment_scanners.htm#8000
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Alan

    nice scanner but won't do the job required unless it can hold single
    negatives of weird sizes.

    For the photos, any half decent flatbed should be ok, but you may need a
    flatbed with neg scanning abilities for the weird sized cut negatives. I
    have many family negs from similar period and a lot of the single negatives
    are not 120 roll film, but all sorts of weird sizes.

    Whatever is possible, it's going to be a big job.

    Nige.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    "Nige" <post@it.in.thegroup> wrote in message
    news:41bc3489_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
    >
    > "Alan Rutlidge .iinet.net.au>" <rutlidge@<No_Spam> wrote in message
    > news:41bc2a96$0$14481$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
    >
    > > Hi Anne,
    > >
    > > Considering you need to scan 1000s of negative you should consider a
    > proper
    > > film scanner.
    > >
    > > Not cheap but apparently pretty good is the Nikon CoolScan 8000ED.
    > >
    >
    http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/scanner/scoolscan_8000_ed/index.htm
    > >
    > > Some reviews at -
    > > http://www.nikonlinks.com/equipment_scanners.htm#8000
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > > Alan
    >
    > nice scanner but won't do the job required unless it can hold single
    > negatives of weird sizes.
    >
    > For the photos, any half decent flatbed should be ok, but you may need a
    > flatbed with neg scanning abilities for the weird sized cut negatives. I
    > have many family negs from similar period and a lot of the single
    negatives
    > are not 120 roll film, but all sorts of weird sizes.
    >
    > Whatever is possible, it's going to be a big job.
    >
    > Nige.
    >
    The alternative might be to approach a digital scanning lab for a quote.
    With such a high number of negs to scan professional drum scanning might be
    the better option. I'm thinking not only the cost of a good film scanner
    but the time to scan them involved. Of course if personal time isn't an
    issue I suppose doing them by hand is entirely feasible and economical.

    I'm no expert on the Nikon 8000, but I'm sure it comes with a range of fixed
    and adjustable masks for 120 roll film. Having scanned both transparencies
    and negative on a flatbed scanner with a proper film adapter unit I can
    assure you it is a time consuming and tedious process I'd rather not have to
    do again.


    Cheers,
    Alan
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    "Alan Rutlidge .iinet.net.au>" <rutlidge@<No_Spam> wrote in message
    news:41bc3905$0$15636$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
    > >
    > The alternative might be to approach a digital scanning lab for a quote.
    > With such a high number of negs to scan professional drum scanning might
    be
    > the better option. I'm thinking not only the cost of a good film scanner
    > but the time to scan them involved. Of course if personal time isn't an
    > issue I suppose doing them by hand is entirely feasible and economical.


    yep, worth the exercise to know what it would cost to compare against the
    cost of buying something(s) and doing it yourself.

    > Having scanned both transparencies
    > and negative on a flatbed scanner with a proper film adapter unit I can
    > assure you it is a time consuming and tedious process I'd rather not have
    to
    > do again.

    agreed! I've got thousands of scans done this way.. but they've been done
    over many years :)

    Cheers, Nige
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:12:41 +1100, "Nige" <post@it.in.thegroup>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Alan Rutlidge .iinet.net.au>" <rutlidge@<No_Spam> wrote in message
    >news:41bc3905$0$15636$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
    >> >
    >> The alternative might be to approach a digital scanning lab for a quote.
    >> With such a high number of negs to scan professional drum scanning might
    >be
    >> the better option. I'm thinking not only the cost of a good film scanner

    My LS5000 ED with the bulk feeder didn't cost a fraction of what it
    would have run to have over 20,000 slides and negatives scanned.

    >> but the time to scan them involved. Of course if personal time isn't an
    >> issue I suppose doing them by hand is entirely feasible and economical.
    >
    >
    >yep, worth the exercise to know what it would cost to compare against the
    >cost of buying something(s) and doing it yourself.
    >
    I have a film/negative capable flat bed (HP 5470c) and a dedicated
    slide/film scanner with the bulk feeder (Nikon LS 5000 ED).

    Having slides and or negatives scanned runs a good 50 cents each
    locally. Some places run closer to a dollar. Either figure makes
    having more than a few scanned quite expensive, but as Nige says,
    scanning is very time consuming. It's time consuming even with the
    bulk feeder. Then you get to edit/process them, develop some sort of
    naming convention, and figure out what to use for a storage medium.

    http://www.rogerhalstead.com/scanning.htm might help a bit.
    It covers a good part of the decision making involved in scanning a
    lot of images.

    >> Having scanned both transparencies
    >> and negative on a flatbed scanner with a proper film adapter unit I can
    >> assure you it is a time consuming and tedious process I'd rather not have

    Although my HP does a reasonable job on slides and negatives, it comes
    up far short of the quality in the LS5000 ED, so I'd use the flat bed
    for that type of work only if the dedicated one had quit working.

    I started a project of scanning "the old family photos" last March. I
    have all the slides done and about 2000 negatives left to go (an
    estimate).

    I still have two large boxes of very old prints that range from
    tintypes to the petrified cardboard. Those boxes are at least 40#
    each, maybe quite a bit more.

    >to
    >> do again.
    >
    >agreed! I've got thousands of scans done this way.. but they've been done
    >over many years :)

    I had about 8 to 10 thousand done on a small scanner. I re scanned
    those along with the rest after purchasing the LS5000 ED

    When working on a batch I usually use the computer to work on
    something else from web browsing to programming. This lets me do the
    scanning more conveniently. Maybe not as fast, but still, it involves
    less work.

    Good luck,

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    www.rogerhalstead.com
    >
    >Cheers, Nige
    >
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:46:00 -0500, Roger
    <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:


    The original post wasn't up when I made my previous post (strange how
    the posts rarely show up in order) so I'd add the Nikon LS 8000 might
    be worth looking into .

    Actually, although not a great scanner, but popular, the old HP S-20
    would probably do any of the photos and negatives up to 5 X 7" or
    about 13 X 18 CM

    I doubt you'll find a flat bed that will do a good job of scanning the
    negatives of odd sizes. Mine has a film holder and that is size
    specific.

    I'd do a search on scanners to see what is available.
    http://www.nextag.com/ would be a starting place to list all scanners
    then do a search on the specific scanners to find one with the
    characteristics you want.

    Another approach would be to contact one of the big retailers such as
    B&H, or one of the big retailers on your side of the pond, and tell
    them what you are after. http://www.photosites.co.uk/projectors.shtml
    in the UK

    A google search on scanners film and print, returns over 1.5 million
    results so there is a lot of material out there.

    Good luck

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    www.rogerhalstead.com
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner,aus.photo (More info?)

    "Roger" <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in message
    news:dc01s0pmkfekflqrrm0qaetr1f62jej2l8@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:46:00 -0500, Roger
    > <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:
    >
    >
    > The original post wasn't up when I made my previous post (strange how
    > the posts rarely show up in order) so I'd add the Nikon LS 8000 might
    > be worth looking into .
    >
    > Actually, although not a great scanner, but popular, the old HP S-20
    > would probably do any of the photos and negatives up to 5 X 7" or
    > about 13 X 18 CM
    >
    > I doubt you'll find a flat bed that will do a good job of scanning the
    > negatives of odd sizes. Mine has a film holder and that is size
    > specific.
    >
    > I'd do a search on scanners to see what is available.
    > http://www.nextag.com/ would be a starting place to list all scanners
    > then do a search on the specific scanners to find one with the
    > characteristics you want.
    >
    > Another approach would be to contact one of the big retailers such as
    > B&H, or one of the big retailers on your side of the pond, and tell
    > them what you are after. http://www.photosites.co.uk/projectors.shtml
    > in the UK
    >
    > A google search on scanners film and print, returns over 1.5 million
    > results so there is a lot of material out there.
    >
    > Good luck
    >
    > Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    > (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    > www.rogerhalstead.com
Ask a new question

Read More

Scanners Photo Peripherals