In article <anyone4tennis-74ADA9.16364027042008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Stewy <anyone4tennis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <ukPQj.209$Yo2.32@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> "Ken Hart" <kwhart1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > "java" <javadesigner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:fv09bb$9uhu$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Hi all:
> > >
> > > I don't know too much about photography. I own a
> > > point and shoot digicam and that's about it.
> > >
<snipped for brevity>
> >
> In addition to the above try scanning at the maximum ppi/dpi your PC can
> handle. If you intend them to only be viewed on screen or in a digital
> frame, the 150-200 is perfect. Scan at 300 if you plan to print full
> size or perhaps from to 50% bigger. 600 if you're aiming at 2x or 3x
> magnification. Don't bother with anything more than 800 - you'll create
> HUGE files and it'll take forever. Save your scans as TIFFs or
> Photoshop's PSD - I'd recommend Elements 5 if your budget doesn't run to
> Photoshop itself. Post scanning work depends on if the photos are
> creased, faded etc or just blemished from being stuck together.
> Remember, many older cameras had poorer lenses, what looks good at 2x2
> inches may look bad at 6x6.
Badly wrinkled photos and other problems with flatness will often cause
shadowing on flatbed scanners. The secret here in multiple scans while
rotating the print by 90 degrees. Drag these extra scans onto new layers
and then carefully erase the problems on each layer.
I also agree with the previous post - never scan above 800dpi or so.
It's a pity these scanner makers don't realise that 3000-4000 dpi is
useless (I sometimes scan stamps at 800-1000) and making an A3 or B4
scanner (or larger) is what many people want.
|
