Advice on digitising printed photos

Forums › Digital Imaging › Advice on digitising printed photos

EviLClouD

306 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 68

#303576 20-Feb-2023 12:04

Hi there, with the recent weather events in the country I feel like it would be a good idea to ‘backup’ and digitalise some physical photos.
I’ve looked online and there were suggestions on just taking a photo with your phone or an app or just scanning the photos with a scanner?
Has anyone here digitised printed photos? Any advice on how to best do this?
Thanks in advance

1 | 2

8031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3820

#3039347 20-Feb-2023 12:06

Do you have the negatives or just the prints?

Mike

EviLClouD

306 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 68

#3039365 20-Feb-2023 12:36

Mostly prints

PolicyGuy

1821 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1772

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3039371 20-Feb-2023 12:46

I have digitised a lot of colour and some black&white prints with the scanner function of my multi-function printer (a Brother MFD-J5320DW as it happens), using the software bundled with the MFD and the 'Microsoft Photos' that ships with Windows-10.
You will note that this is all 'free' (as in beer, not liberty) software.
I have scanned at 300x300 and 600x600 resolution, and decided that there didn't seem to be a lot of advantage in the higher resolution - this may be a deficiency in the actual scanner.

The results aren't perfect, but they're a lot better than looking sadly at smoke / water / heat damaged photos, knowing that they're gone for ever.

I suspect you could do better, maybe even a lot better, with a high-end scanner and professional level software, but "you fight with the army you have, not the one you'd like to have" ;)

Good luck!

Edit: grammar

richms

29104 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10222

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3039384 20-Feb-2023 13:20

Whenever I have tried a cheap consumer MFC type scanner it has always crushed the blacks and the whites quite aggressively making a very contrasty looking image I would not be happy with. I guess you could do multiple scans at different brightness levels and stitch them like doing an HDR photo but I really shouldn't have to.

Richard rich.ms

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#3039386 20-Feb-2023 13:21

What is the quality/size/resolution of the photos? How would they be enjoyed? In most cases an ordinary scanner would probably be fine, as would a phone camera. You probably wouldn't noice any difference in quality. If you want to exhibit the photos in a gallery, you might need something better.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

wellygary

8813 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5298

#3039392 20-Feb-2023 13:32

EviLClouD: Hi there, with the recent weather events in the country I feel like it would be a good idea to ‘backup’ and digitalise some physical photos.
I’ve looked online and there were suggestions on just taking a photo with your phone or an app or just scanning the photos with a scanner?
Has anyone here digitised printed photos? Any advice on how to best do this?
Thanks in advance

How many are you talking about scanning?. If its a couple of hundred you can probably get by with a phone, but unless you have a mount arm of other phone holder the quality will vary from shot to shot also the lighting and shadows get to be annoying.

A flatbed will give you a more consistent result, esp for large runs,

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

EviLClouD

306 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 68

#3039485 20-Feb-2023 15:43

Rikkitic:
What is the quality/size/resolution of the photos? How would they be enjoyed? In most cases an ordinary scanner would probably be fine, as would a phone camera. You probably wouldn't noice any difference in quality. If you want to exhibit the photos in a gallery, you might need something better.

I think the bulk are the standard 6x9 photo size

wellygary:
How many are you talking about scanning?. If its a couple of hundred you can probably get by with a phone, but unless you have a mount arm of other phone holder the quality will vary from shot to shot also the lighting and shadows get to be annoying.

A flatbed will give you a more consistent result, esp for large runs,

Probably in the 500-1000 range. I havent properly checked.
The thing that worries me with a phone photo is the glare and reflection. Is there anything that reduces that?
Or if i go down the path of a scanner, will there still be glare/reflection in the scans?
Are there specific scanner specs/feature i should look for?

josephhinvest

1550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 322

ID Verified

Trusted

#3039495 20-Feb-2023 15:59

Flatbed scanning is the ultimate choice. Expensive and slow, but best results.

If you just want to digitise just a few in the meantime - I was really impressed recently using the Google PhotoScan iPhone app, it gets you to take 4 images centered on each corner of the photo and it merges them with no glare.

Cheers,
Joseph

Example now attached. Taken with an iPhone 13, results in an 8MP image.

antoniosk

2383 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 750

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3039497 20-Feb-2023 16:01

I used the PhotoScan app by google. It’s results are very good, just practise on setting up your lights/reflections and experiment.

it’s a slow process but it works pretty well.

________

Antoniosk

tanivula

998 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 158

Lifetime subscriber

#3039499 20-Feb-2023 16:08

antoniosk:

I used the PhotoScan app by google. It’s results are very good, just practise on setting up your lights/reflections and experiment.

it’s a slow process but it works pretty well.

Yep, another vote for the Google PhotoScan app. Yep, it is a slow process, but the results are great.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#3039515 20-Feb-2023 16:46

You can pay, 30-50c per photo. It all comes down to how valuable your time is.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#3039526 20-Feb-2023 17:15

I had excellent results with a flatbed scanner bringing out detail not seen in the original. It is time consuming. Is there a service that does this at high quality?

nitro

761 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 338

#3039548 20-Feb-2023 17:55

can you get decent results with a phone? sure, but to get consistent results for 1000 prints will be much harder than with proper equipment.

i say do it properly and do it once. to get the best output, you need a decent flatbed scanner.

as mentioned above, the scanning function of multi-function printers used to be wanting. having said that, technology has improved. the software they bundle is equally important. i have used an epson wf-3640 and have had pretty good results. Epson Scan for even this model has a 'Professional Mode' that gives you options for Backlight Correction, Dust Correction, Dust Removal, etc.

Will it touch the Epson Perfection V850 in quality? absolutely not. but depending on the quality of your source, the difference might not be significant.

nitro

761 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 338

#3039554 20-Feb-2023 18:10

gzt: I had excellent results with a flatbed scanner bringing out detail not seen in the original. It is time consuming. Is there a service that does this at high quality?

strictly speaking this doesn't really happen, i.e. you cannot get more detail than the source material. however, flatbed scanners that support Digital ICE gives such a remarkable improvement that the naked eye sees it as increased detail. in reality, it is mostly due to the corrections applied to prints that have already faded and/or has scratches. digital ICE working on such material is a thing of magic.

EviLClouD

306 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 68

#3040003 21-Feb-2023 12:52

Thanks for the replies, super helpful!
Time wise is it more efficient to use Photoscan by Google or to use a scanner?
I assume any cheap multifunction printer with a scanner would do? Or are there specific brands/models to avoid?

1 | 2