Recommendations for Scanning Vintage Photos

[Maddog1955]

Does anyone have a scanner recommendation to capture Large vintage Photographs
from 1890-1935. There are a combination of albumen, Sepia toned,and Black and White
prints probably due to the advancement in photography and processing advancments during the period.

Looking for top quality Scans and how to deal with the size of the prints

Sizes 9x7 and very large 18 1/2 x 22 1/2

Also for clean up and retouch what software would
work best

[Peter De Smidt]

A pro flatbed would work well. A Scitex, Creo, Kodak Eversmart; a Screen Cezanne; a Fuji Lenovia... You'll want to check the max size of the scanning bed. These are all expensive and large. Any decent consumer scanner should be able to handle the smaller stuff.

[Oren Grad]

Get this and read it before you buy any hardware or software:

http://photo-repair.com/DigiRestBook.htm

Regardless of which way you go, if you're not already experienced in copy work and in processing of digital images - likely the case, given your question - expect a substantial learning curve if you want really excellent results.

[Matus Kalisky]

Well, I am not an experienced with these type of scans, but given what I have read on the topic photos should be rather easy to scan reflective materials - they do not need large Dmax or resolution (more than 600 spi makes most probably no sense, even 300 may be enough). So I think that the true problem of yours is the size as I doubt that any of the scanners mentioned will handle 18x22. Even the new scanners that should be suitable for this kind for work like Epson 10000XL only go up to A3 (about 12 x 16 ). You many need to go with a stitching method. Or one could used some large resolution DSLR on a copy stand or tripod.

For software I would probably use Photoshop, but I guess many others (e.g. Lightroom) could be used. Even Photoshop Elements should me more than enough for slight adjustment. Or Gimp if you for some reason want to work under Linux or just prefer free software.

Still - if you would tell us what is the end product for you you may get more answers.

[Gem Singer]

Might be a good idea to set up a copying stand and lights and shoot them with a digital camera.

Then edit the files in Photoshop.

[Oren Grad]

The devil is in the details. What condition are the originals in? What kind of handling can they tolerate? Are they mounted? Matted? Bound into a volume? Are they flat or warped? Are the surfaces glossy, smooth matte or irregularly textured? What kind of final product is needed - an electronic image file for viewing on a screen, or reproduction prints? How large? In what medium? At what level of quality?

Flatbeds are convenient, but there are situations where a flatbed is not the best solution.

[Peter De Smidt]

For example, the scanning bed of a Cezanne will handle originals from 13.4 inches x 20.9 inches. For the other pro flatbeds, you'd have to do some googling.

As others have said, it's doing the really large ones that causes a huge increase in price and complexity.

If it were me, and I didn't already have a pro scanner, I'd get a decent Epson flatbed for the smaller pictures and a copy setup with a dslr for the big prints.

[Anthony Lewis]

I have just done a job with large prints from the 1960's that I'm restoring. I use a Microtek F1 scanner with Silverfast software. For negs I scan in HDR mode, but for reflective materials I don't feel HDR is necessary. Each print took four scans to cover them, and I stitched them together in Photoshop - easy. I am more than happy and so is the client.

A good scanner with good software is essential. I believe the top of the range Epson or Microtek scanners are the least to go for. To me Silverfast is essential as well.

[rjphil]

Instead of scanning, I would set up a double-polarized situation (copy lights and lens), and shoot digital. The polarizing will eliminate most, if not all, of any silvering in the prints. The only issue that might arise is whether to use an easel or a flat copy surface, depending on the condition of the print materials. This has worked very well for me, both with film, and digital.

[Lenny Eiger]

Instead of scanning, I would set up a double-polarized situation (copy lights and lens), and shoot digital.

Direct scanning is excellent. I have photographed things that are too large to fit on my scanner plenty of times, but a high-end scanner is a great tool... especially for this.

I have just finished a series of prints of images taken by John Steinbeck. A lot of restoration required... and there's nothing like sticking it on the drum scanner and getting a great file... I'd go with the high end flatbed for the larger ones...

Lenny