Old prints and negatives

[im5150too]

My project with my Nikon V and Epson 4870 is progressing nicely,
thanks to all the help I have received here. Couple of questions on
the older pics and negatives:

1. I have a lot of small B/W prints, roughly 2 1/2" X 3". Some of
these are the only pictures that exist of some of my relatives. It
would be nice to print some of them at maybe 2X size. Best
resolution? Scan in color or greyscale? Any other hints or settings?

2. Some of the older prints have a lot of dirt and some have ink on
them. I've tried cleaning them with Pec-12, but not much help.
Should I try more aggressive methods, or just clean them up with
Photoshop?

3. Quite a few older negatives. 126 and larger ones I haven't
identified yet. I've read I may be able to scan the 126's in my Nikon
V. Is this the best idea, or should I use my Epson 4870? Should I buy
the adapter that's frequently mentioned here? Or should I take these
to a professional?

 

[David Dyer-Bennet]

My project with my Nikon V and Epson 4870 is progressing nicely,
thanks to all the help I have received here. Couple of questions on
the older pics and negatives:

1. I have a lot of small B/W prints, roughly 2 1/2" X 3". Some of
these are the only pictures that exist of some of my relatives. It
would be nice to print some of them at maybe 2X size. Best
resolution? Scan in color or greyscale? Any other hints or settings?

My feeling is that there's no point scanning old prints beyond 1x/300
dpi, because they simply don't have more information than that in
them. You can still print them perhaps 2x bigger and they'll look
decent -- especially if not held up close and examined carefully.

I normally scan grayscale, unless I'm trying to reproduce the old
image tone, *or* unless there is discoloration. Scanning in color can
help a *lot* in removing discolorations later (same trick as using
color filters on a copy camera).

2. Some of the older prints have a lot of dirt and some have ink on
them. I've tried cleaning them with Pec-12, but not much help.
Should I try more aggressive methods, or just clean them up with
Photoshop?

Get the best scan you can before trying more aggressive methods. It'd
be a shame to ruin the print -- but even *more* of a shame to ruin it
without getting a good scan first .

I don't know what more aggressive methods might be worth trying,
though. Anybody ever tried "Goof-Off" on photos? I'd think there was
a good chance it'd clean the emultsion right off the paper.

3. Quite a few older negatives. 126 and larger ones I haven't
identified yet. I've read I may be able to scan the 126's in my Nikon
V. Is this the best idea, or should I use my Epson 4870? Should I buy
the adapter that's frequently mentioned here? Or should I take these
to a professional?

The film scanner will do better on the film than even the 4870
flatbed, so try the 126s that way. Should work okay, though I haven't
done it myself (never had a 126). No special reason you'd need
professional help to scan these. I've scanned 127, 120, 620, and 616
negs on my (much less nice) flatbed and gotten decent results.

 

[im5150too]

My feeling is that there's no point scanning old prints beyond 1x/300
dpi, because they simply don't have more information than that in
them. You can still print them perhaps 2x bigger and they'll look
decent -- especially if not held up close and examined carefully.

I normally scan grayscale, unless I'm trying to reproduce the old
image tone, *or* unless there is discoloration. Scanning in color can
help a *lot* in removing discolorations later (same trick as using
color filters on a copy camera).


Get the best scan you can before trying more aggressive methods. It'd
be a shame to ruin the print -- but even *more* of a shame to ruin it
without getting a good scan first .

I don't know what more aggressive methods might be worth trying,
though. Anybody ever tried "Goof-Off" on photos? I'd think there was
a good chance it'd clean the emultsion right off the paper.


The film scanner will do better on the film than even the 4870
flatbed, so try the 126s that way. Should work okay, though I haven't
done it myself (never had a 126). No special reason you'd need
professional help to scan these. I've scanned 127, 120, 620, and 616
negs on my (much less nice) flatbed and gotten decent results.

Thanks again, to all of the folks here with tips and help. This has
been a lot of fun, and very emotional, as I've found pictures of
family and friends who've been gone for many years, that we didn't
know we had! I guess what happened, if it was a good picture, it was
sent off to relatives, and there wasn't always money for reprints.

Well, I tried the 126's in my Nikon. Wouldn't pull through, just
jammed it. I've read where people have modified the negatives to
work in the Nikon. Not sure if I want to try that.

I tried some of the larger negatives, (620? 120?), in the Epson 4870
with mixed results, mainly operator error I think. Not sure which
resolution to use. I tried around 3000 and the files were huge! The
scans also took around 18 minutes with ICE on, with just 2 negatives
in the tray. I'll try some more today. On the plus side, the ICE in
the 4870 actually seemed to be doing something to the negatives. Not
nearly as much as the Nikon, but at least doing something, which is
more than it does on prints.....

Any other hints on the 126's? I've got quite a few of them, so it
would be nice to find a convenient way to scan them.

Also, I have found that scanning the B/W's in RGB did make it easier
to remove some of the defects like ink in Photoshop. Thanks for that
tip!

 

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Well, I tried the 126's in my Nikon. Wouldn't pull through, just
jammed it. I've read where people have modified the negatives to
work in the Nikon. Not sure if I want to try that.

Eep! Sorry, didn't mean you should try the film strip feeder. Use
the manual holder that then goes into the slide adapter.

I tried some of the larger negatives, (620? 120?), in the Epson 4870
with mixed results, mainly operator error I think. Not sure which
resolution to use. I tried around 3000 and the files were huge! The
scans also took around 18 minutes with ICE on, with just 2 negatives
in the tray. I'll try some more today. On the plus side, the ICE in
the 4870 actually seemed to be doing something to the negatives. Not
nearly as much as the Nikon, but at least doing something, which is
more than it does on prints.....

Yes, the files from big negatives will tend to be big. Not surprised
they're slow, either.

If you're sure of the limits of what you want to do with the files,
you might scan at a lower resolution -- as follows: figure 300 pixels
per inch at the largest print size you'll ever need, and scan to give
yourself at least that big an image.

 

[im5150too]

Eep! Sorry, didn't mean you should try the film strip feeder. Use
the manual holder that then goes into the slide adapter.


Yes, the files from big negatives will tend to be big. Not surprised
they're slow, either.

If you're sure of the limits of what you want to do with the files,
you might scan at a lower resolution -- as follows: figure 300 pixels
per inch at the largest print size you'll ever need, and scan to give
yourself at least that big an image.

Ahhhh.... I'm not sure I got the filmstrip holder with my Coolpix V,
I'll look into getting one.

So, for a 5X7 print, what would scan at? I'm confused....