Found hundreds of photos: How to scan them to my PC

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by hantocbijwadj@yahoo.com, Jul 11, 2007.

  1. Guest

    How would you recommend a regular person scan hundreds of 4x6 color
    photos into a Windows PC?

    My parents left us hundreds of 4x6 color photos of us when we were
    kids, most have negatives in sleeves, but many don't have the
    negatives handy.

    What is the recommended way to scan them in?
    I presume we need to buy a special scanner that can feed them quickly?
    It seems that putting them on my flatbed scanner will take the rest of
    my life so there must be a better faster way.

    How much would the equipment cost?
    What would we look for as basic equipment?
    And, what special software or hardware is needed?

    Thank you,
    Hanna
    , Jul 11, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. SMS Guest

    wrote:
    > How would you recommend a regular person scan hundreds of 4x6 color
    > photos into a Windows PC?
    >
    > My parents left us hundreds of 4x6 color photos of us when we were
    > kids, most have negatives in sleeves, but many don't have the
    > negatives handy.
    >
    > What is the recommended way to scan them in?
    > I presume we need to buy a special scanner that can feed them quickly?
    > It seems that putting them on my flatbed scanner will take the rest of
    > my life so there must be a better faster way.
    >
    > How much would the equipment cost?
    > What would we look for as basic equipment?
    > And, what special software or hardware is needed?


    For negative scanning, I use Costco. They have a very high resolution
    negative scanner. I think they charged me 29¢ each. I thought of getting
    a negative scanner, but a good negative scanner is at least $500, and
    not as good quality

    They may do print scanning as well, I'm not sure.

    Forget about feeding photos in an automatic feeder, you have to do it
    manually. Get a good photo scanner like the Epson 4990 (4800x9600 dpi)
    and be prepared for some horrendously large files.
    SMS, Jul 11, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    On Jul 11, 3:50 am, wrote:
    > How would you recommend a regular person scan hundreds of 4x6 color
    > photos into a Windows PC?
    >
    > My parents left us hundreds of 4x6 color photos of us when we were
    > kids, most have negatives in sleeves, but many don't have the
    > negatives handy.
    >
    > What is the recommended way to scan them in?
    > I presume we need to buy a special scanner that can feed them quickly?
    > It seems that putting them on my flatbed scanner will take the rest of
    > my life so there must be a better faster way.
    >
    > How much would the equipment cost?
    > What would we look for as basic equipment?
    > And, what special software or hardware is needed?
    >
    > Thank you,
    > Hanna



    Edit the photos, surely not all are fantastic, keep only the fantastic
    ones. If there are 25 pics of your sister you and the dog, keep 1, the
    best one. This is the only way you will stay sane. Just went through
    this with my parents, we dumped 95% of the photos but treasure the 5%
    we kept.
    If all you have is prints, any flatbed will do, you do get what you
    pay for. If you have negatives and prints, look at the Epson, 4490,
    4990, or the newer V700. The 4490 is a good lowish end scanner that
    you should be able to find for under $200, the look at the 4990 or the
    V700 is your parents had a good camera, about upper $300s for the 4990
    or $550 for the V700. The V700 is a fast, very good scanner, competes
    favorably with film scanners. Microtek, Canon and HP all have scanners
    that are comparable, though I think Epson currently has the edge.
    4x6 prints aren't very useful for anything but screen viewing and
    other 4x6 prints, just scan them at 200ppi, file won't be that large.
    Negatives can be scanned at1200ppi for screen viewing and up to
    3200ppi for printing, this gives a 40mb file, so only do it if you
    feel you are going to print 8x10 to 11x14, if all you want is 4x6s use
    1800-2400ppi. If you have a lot of negatives get a scanner with
    Digital Ice, takes away all but the worst dirt and scratches, it is
    that sanity thing again.

    Tom
    , Jul 11, 2007
    #3
  4. wrote on Wed, 11 Jul 2007
    05:17:43 -0700:

    tcm> On Jul 11, 3:50 am, wrote:
    ??>> How would you recommend a regular person scan hundreds of
    ??>> 4x6 color photos into a Windows PC?
    ??>>
    ??>>
    ??>> How much would the equipment cost?
    ??>> What would we look for as basic equipment?
    ??>> And, what special software or hardware is needed?
    ??>>
    ??>> Thank you,
    ??>> Hanna

    tcm> Edit the photos, surely not all are fantastic, keep only
    tcm> the fantastic ones. If there are 25 pics of your sister
    tcm> you and the dog, keep 1, the best one. This is the only
    tcm> way you will stay sane. Just went through this with my
    tcm> parents, we dumped 95% of the photos but treasure the 5%
    tcm> we kept. If all you have is prints, any flatbed will do,
    tcm> you do get what you pay for. If you have negatives and
    tcm> prints, look at the Epson, 4490, 4990, or the newer V700.
    tcm> The 4490 is a good lowish end scanner that you should be
    tcm> able to find for under $200, the look at the 4990 or the
    tcm> V700 is your parents had a good camera, about upper $300s
    tcm> for the 4990 or $550 for the V700. The V700 is a fast,
    tcm> very good scanner, competes favorably with film scanners.
    tcm> Microtek, Canon and HP all have scanners that are
    <<Snipped>>>

    For prints it would be less tedious, even after selection,to
    have some form of automatic feeding but is there such a thing as
    a flat-bed scanner with a document feeder that actually works
    without jamming? I have tried a few in the past without much
    luck. If color prints are old, almost certainly some editing
    will be necessary but that can be done in small sessions. It is
    remarkable how well Photoshop Elements can restore colors.


    James Silverton
    Potomac, Maryland

    E-mail, with obvious alterations:
    not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
    James Silverton, Jul 11, 2007
    #4
  5. Guest

    To add to what's been said: Scanning the negatives will produce much
    better scans, particularly if the scanner has Digital ICE. I wouldn't
    use a scanner or service without ICE. It fixes many scratches and
    other blemishes that would otherwise be very time consuming or
    annoying.

    While I've only used a slide scanning service, there have been
    numerous magazine and newspaper articles in the last six months on
    services (and equipment they can buy) to do exactly what you want with
    the prints -- because in most cases the prints are all that's
    available. I don't have any of those articles handy, but expect a web
    search would turn them up.

    Good luck. I've been enjoying my father's old slides, some going back
    over 60 years and in amazingly good shape -- but only after ICE!

    Martin
    , Jul 12, 2007
    #5
  6. Guest

    On Jul 11, 4:28 pm, wrote:
    > Good luck. I've been enjoying my father's old slides, some going back
    > over 60 years and in amazingly good shape -- but only after ICE!


    Does this ice method work on both slides (positives) and negatives?
    , Jul 12, 2007
    #6
  7. Matt Ion Guest

    wrote:
    > How would you recommend a regular person scan hundreds of 4x6 color
    > photos into a Windows PC?
    >
    > My parents left us hundreds of 4x6 color photos of us when we were
    > kids, most have negatives in sleeves, but many don't have the
    > negatives handy.
    >
    > What is the recommended way to scan them in?
    > I presume we need to buy a special scanner that can feed them quickly?
    > It seems that putting them on my flatbed scanner will take the rest of
    > my life so there must be a better faster way.
    >
    > How much would the equipment cost?
    > What would we look for as basic equipment?
    > And, what special software or hardware is needed?


    I have an old HP OfficeJet v40 all-in-one unit; the fax/scanner option
    is via page feeder. I recently went through several hundred old photos,
    mostly 4x6, a few 5x7 and 3.5x5, the odd APS panoramic, and even some
    ancient B&W prints, vetted them down to a couple hundred "keepers", and
    scanned them quite efficiently with the HP. Set for 300dpi scans,
    scanned a dozen or so in a batch, the software created multipage TIFFs,
    and IrfanView split the TIFFs out into individual JPEGs. Whole thing
    was done in about three hours.
    Matt Ion, Jul 12, 2007
    #7
  8. writes:
    > Does this ice method work on both slides (positives) and negatives?


    Yes, but not with most black and white film.

    --
    Fredrik Sandström
    Fredrik Sandstrom, Jul 12, 2007
    #8
  9. Ron Hunter Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > wrote:
    >> How would you recommend a regular person scan hundreds of 4x6 color
    >> photos into a Windows PC?
    >>
    >> My parents left us hundreds of 4x6 color photos of us when we were
    >> kids, most have negatives in sleeves, but many don't have the
    >> negatives handy.
    >>
    >> What is the recommended way to scan them in?
    >> I presume we need to buy a special scanner that can feed them quickly?
    >> It seems that putting them on my flatbed scanner will take the rest of
    >> my life so there must be a better faster way.
    >>
    >> How much would the equipment cost?
    >> What would we look for as basic equipment?
    >> And, what special software or hardware is needed?

    >
    > For negative scanning, I use Costco. They have a very high resolution
    > negative scanner. I think they charged me 29¢ each. I thought of getting
    > a negative scanner, but a good negative scanner is at least $500, and
    > not as good quality
    >
    > They may do print scanning as well, I'm not sure.
    >
    > Forget about feeding photos in an automatic feeder, you have to do it
    > manually. Get a good photo scanner like the Epson 4990 (4800x9600 dpi)
    > and be prepared for some horrendously large files.


    Scanning a print at such high resolution is a waste of time and disk
    space. See www.scantips.net for more information on scanning photos.
    Ron Hunter, Jul 12, 2007
    #9
  10. Guest Guest

    On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:16:39 -0500, Ron Hunter <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Forget about feeding photos in an automatic feeder, you have to do it
    >> manually. Get a good photo scanner like the Epson 4990 (4800x9600 dpi)
    >> and be prepared for some horrendously large files.

    >
    >Scanning a print at such high resolution is a waste of time and disk
    >space. See www.scantips.net for more information on scanning photos.


    I agree !
    When I started scanning old photo albums,
    I made some test CD's at different resolutions.
    I settled on a file size that showed up best on our TV set.
    ( about 100K bit jpg files )

    My ( EPSON ) scanner software allows multiple pics
    to be scanned at once....
    Load 6 or 8 photos, scan once, produce 8 jpg's )

    Scanning was a perfect pastime for nights
    when there's nothing on TV.



    <rj>
    Guest, Jul 12, 2007
    #10
  11. Kadin2048 Guest

    In article <46949746$0$27249$>,
    SMS <> wrote:

    > For negative scanning, I use Costco. They have a very high resolution
    > negative scanner. I think they charged me 29¢ each. I thought of getting
    > a negative scanner, but a good negative scanner is at least $500, and
    > not as good quality


    Although I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with Costco if it
    works out for you, the scanner they're probably using to do negatives
    there is the imaging part of a Frontier minilab system; the quality from
    this can vary *greatly* depending on the type of film, and the settings
    chosen by the operator (which tends to be a direct function of how
    experienced the operator is, and how much they care about your order and
    the results).

    I've had very poor results, for instance, with Frontier scans from B&W
    film. They seem to do OK at my local place with modern color neg film,
    but they seem to compress the dynamic range a lot.

    To say that the Frontier is better than a $500 scanner is a bit of a
    stretch; it depends a lot on what you're scanning and what you want to
    get out of it. Properly used, a $500 film scanner with Digital ICE and
    VueScan can beat the tar out of Frontier scans.

    It's just a question of whether it's worth it.

    >
    > They may do print scanning as well, I'm not sure.
    >
    > Forget about feeding photos in an automatic feeder, you have to do it
    > manually. Get a good photo scanner like the Epson 4990 (4800x9600 dpi)
    > and be prepared for some horrendously large files.


    There's no point in scanning a print at more than 300 dpi, IMO. Maybe
    600 dpi if it's a real work of art and you want to archive every last
    detail in it. But above that, you're just scanning the texture in the
    paper and the projected grains in the film.

    -Kadin.
    Kadin2048, Jul 13, 2007
    #11
  12. Ron Hunter Guest

    <RJ> wrote:
    > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:16:39 -0500, Ron Hunter <> wrote:
    >>> Forget about feeding photos in an automatic feeder, you have to do it
    >>> manually. Get a good photo scanner like the Epson 4990 (4800x9600 dpi)
    >>> and be prepared for some horrendously large files.

    >> Scanning a print at such high resolution is a waste of time and disk
    >> space. See www.scantips.net for more information on scanning photos.

    >
    > I agree !
    > When I started scanning old photo albums,
    > I made some test CD's at different resolutions.
    > I settled on a file size that showed up best on our TV set.
    > ( about 100K bit jpg files )
    >
    > My ( EPSON ) scanner software allows multiple pics
    > to be scanned at once....
    > Load 6 or 8 photos, scan once, produce 8 jpg's )
    >
    > Scanning was a perfect pastime for nights
    > when there's nothing on TV.
    >
    >
    >
    > <rj>


    I find it rather tedious, and 'fiddly' to do over a few minutes. I am
    not into repetitious and tedious operations.
    The suggestion above will produce very poor results (I know, I have done
    this), as the scanner is unable to adjust to each individual picture, or
    at least MINE is. The result is that some pictures look fine, and
    others virtually unviewable.
    Ron Hunter, Jul 13, 2007
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jimmy

    i Receive hundreds of $'s! i

    Jimmy, May 8, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    380
    Avenger©
    May 9, 2004
  2. Mike Timbell
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,489
    Don Wiss
    Nov 13, 2003
  3. Patrick Briggs
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    957
    Marvin
    Feb 20, 2006
  4. Martin
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    602
    dadiOH
    Jan 14, 2007
  5. tapyeno
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    307
    Eric Stevens
    Aug 27, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page