Photo Reproduction

Barry Churcher · #1 30-11-05, 04:19

Today I was loaned some photos by my neighbour Merv. His father in law, Ted, has gone into the hospital with cancer and won't be coming home. Merv is in the process of cleaning up the house and found these photos. As is typical Ted never talked about the war and no one had seen these photos before.
They are the small size B&W of course and are of questionable quality. Do any of you guys or gals know the best way to have them reproduced? I have tried to scan this type of photo before but wasn't happy with the results. Any ideas?
Thanks in advance.
Barry

Keith Webb · #2 30-11-05, 06:39

If they're questionable as originals there's probably not a lot you can do to enhance them without a good photo editiing program like photoshop and a good deal of experience.

The best thing is to scan them at 300 dpi greyscale or even 600dpi if they're very small.

I can help if you like once they're scanned.

herr-pear · #3 30-11-05, 08:22

In my opinion this is one of the few areas where film is better than digital. Take the prints to a decent photo lab or high end camera store (If such can be found any more) and have copy negatives made. Then when the copy negatives are printed, contrast can be adjusted, dodging and burning can compensate for over/under exposure, cropping can be performed. You might also look for a long-time professional photographer or active amatuer who still their film equipment

Roger in Vegas

Keith Webb · #4 30-11-05, 08:57

I'd agree with you there to a point, Roger. There is still more information in a neg than most digital cameras can produce although that is rapidly changing.

I went through my old negatives some time ago and photographed them on a lightbox using my Nikon digital camera with a macro lens, so the digital "negs" are 1:1 size. I then inverted and adjusted them in Photoshop and the results are far better than I could ever print them (but not as well as my wife could print them)

Here's an example:

Healesville sawmill, 1974

Barry Churcher · #5 01-12-05, 02:26

Thanks Keith and Roger. I think I will try both ideas and see what happens. I will get them scanned and send them to you Keith, to see what can be done. There are a couple of CMP's and one of an AutoCar? pulling a Dodge ambulance out of a ditch.
Thanks again for the responses.
Cheers,
Barry

Barry Churcher · #6 04-12-05, 03:19

Here is the first photo of Ted's. Unfortunately we can't ask him any details as he has now passed away. I will send seperately to Keith.
Barry

Barry Churcher · #7 04-12-05, 03:40

Here is another. Looks like this these were taken in Canada.
Barry

Keith Webb · #8 04-12-05, 03:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Barry Churcher
Here is the first photo of Ted's. Unfortunately we can't ask him any details as he has now passed away. I will send seperately to Keith.
Barry

Thanks, Barry

You'd have to wonder how this happened, wouldn't you?

David_Hayward (RIP) · #9 04-12-05, 08:47

Before scannning and enhancement was available I took my set of Canadian 1940-41 prints to a guy who was indeed a high-end photographer, specialising in repros and graphics for advertising, etc. He produced a large set of negs in large format and then prints. Brilliant job. However these days I send them off to my company expert who used a £4500 scanner but even then the best results apparently are with a drum scanner, and then it's down to software. There are some guys and gals out there that can then spend hours on jut one photo and do miracles with it, but they cost. £25 per print say.

Keith Webb · #10 04-12-05, 09:11

Quote:

Originally posted by David_Hayward
Before scannning and enhancement was available I took my set of Canadian 1940-41 prints to a guy who was indeed a high-end photographer, specialising in repros and graphics for advertising, etc. He produced a large set of negs in large format and then prints. Brilliant job. However these days I send them off to my company expert who used a £4500 scanner but even then the best results apparently are with a drum scanner, and then it's down to software. There are some guys and gals out there that can then spend hours on jut one photo and do miracles with it, but they cost. £25 per print say.

David, it all depends on what your application is.

For the ultimate in quality digital archiving then perhaps that's able to be justified. But for the sort of thing I do then I feel either scanning at 300 to 600dpi or rephotographing negatives as I outlined earlier is more than enough. One of these digital negatives is capable of at least an A3 blowup, and is close to 35mm film resolution.

A case of horses for courses, but as the cost to quality continues to move in favour of better quality for lower cost, then there's no reason not to go for the best.

The more people who keep high quality copies of these interesting images the better chance of them being preserved into the future.

David_Hayward (RIP) · #11 04-12-05, 13:11

Keith, good points. That's why I keep my original album sacrosanct, and look at the prints I made for studying BUT the negs stay safely stored and have never been out of their envelopes.

I just wish to add towo comments:
1. Hi-res scans can do wonders for photos but it does cost money, either in buying a scanner etc. or having the job done and then there's the mega-buck software. However there's always the future .... what will technoolgy in ten years time be able to do compared with today's?
See
http://www.trolleybus.net/group1.htm

for an example of what can happen to old slides and the best software can do now.

2. Negatives can always be copies and adjusted, and are possibly cheaper to run off, etc. I buy classic trucks photos for 50 pence now, and I just love to handle photos as part of my personal collection. The cost is too small to complain that they are not on CD and I can save the prints for the future.

However too many negatives and prints are being thrown out and here is an example of a print in my dads' post-war army album from Jaffa, Palestine [1948...note Arabic and English style rego on the 1941-on Chevy] that would have been missed if I have not decided to go through it after he had written his final set of biographies.

I cringe when I hear of so many photo archives and collections just being thrown out, sometimes in spite for some 'political' reason in companies that shoudl know better.

Another problem is when people who may have collected 50,000 negatives say in their lifetime, pass on. What do the Personal Representatives or next-of-kin do? If they sell or donate to one of the small photo archives will we ever get a chance to see them because the photographer was the only one who knew what was on them? This is the case with one archive of 80,000 photos!

Barry Churcher · #12 27-12-05, 19:28

Here is a part of Ted's Regimental photo. This is the first one of these real long photos I have seen that has had vehicles in it. It's too bad that the CMP's are in the back row. This is the Midland Regiment in Lindsay Ont.

Barry Churcher · #13 27-12-05, 19:40

Here is the next scan of the same photo.