Advice on scanning/archiving images

[bstrides]

I've bought an Epson V700 based on some helpful advice from people on this forum. Now I want to begin scanning my family photographs and archiving them for future reference. Can anybody offer useful advice on how best to go about this? In particular:

* Which scanning software is better: SilverFast or Epson Scan?

* At what level detail should I scan for general use (I've been told 2400dpi is sufficient)?

* Should I use archiving software or best to avoid if it's for long-term storage? Is there a standardized way of archiving images that I should follow?

Any other advice more than welcome. Perhaps there are some good books or websites you can point me too?

Thanks,

B

[Norman]

You could try <u>here. </u>

[Wheelu]

If you want to carry out any post processing, you are best off scanning at 16 bit resolution, even if you intend to store at 8 bit, e.g. JPG or as an 8 bit TIFF. The sixteen bit images are a lot more resilient when you start to play with them in PS or whatever you are using, and there is less chance of introducing digital artifacts. For colour, using Epson speak, that is 48 bit ( 3 x 16).

A flat bed scanner is probably only capable of a native resolution of around 2400 dpi, but do test yours at various resolutions to see if there are any real differences. I recently had a film scanned using a Durst Sigma professional scanner, and the results blew my Epson scans out of the water. It's not just the improvement in resolution, the recovery of both shadow and highlight detail was far superior.

Your choice of storage is probably TIFF or JPG. TIFF takes up much more space but does not involve the digital compression that JPG is designed to carry out. Bear in mind that many photographers shoot in JPG, so it is a perfectly viable medium, provided that you understand its limitations.

With regard to archival storage, there is an argument that the best method for the amateur is probably film. Who knows how many different operating systems and types of media will be introduced in the next 10, 20 or 50 years. Unless you constantly keep up to date, and those who follow you do likewise, at some point the digital images will become inaccessible, while film should always remain readable.

There are some exceptions to this, for example I have boxes of Agfa slides that have deteriorated significantly, but my home developed b&w negatives remain capable of producing reasonable results after the best part of 50 years.

It's tricky work, predicting the future

[bstrides]

Thanks for the kind advice, though it has taken me a year to get to the starting line! Time does fly.

I have two more questions which I hope somebody can answer.

1. For many images I have the choice of scanning the 6x4 print or the 35mm negative. Which is likely to produce the best result?

2. I have the choice of adjusting image colour, contrast, etc, before scanning (via my scanner's preview option) and after (via photo-editing software). Is there a view as to whether it's best to adjust images before or after scanning?

Once again many thanks for your help.

[swanseadave]

You could try <u>here. </u>

Thank you for posting that Norman. Bookmarked!!
I`ve been trying to get my head around that for ages.He explains things very well.The site even Knew my monitor resolution of 1440x900.Amazing.

Cheers