Filmscanners mailing list archive (email@example.com)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: Archiving Photos (a little off-topic)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynn Allen" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Archiving Photos (a little off-topic)
| Maris wrote (in answer to Tomasz' question):
| >| Do I need the same for b&w prints?
| >I would suggest scanning and saving them in color, especially since you
| >mention below that the old paper is not showing a color cast. You may
| >find that one or more of the channels have better detail, contrast,
| >luminosity etc. than others.
| That's an interesting thought, Maris, and one I hadn't considered a lot
| until you mentioned it. One would *hope* that a BW scan would incorporate
| *all* the values of an old print, but that might not actually be the case,
| in old sepia prints. I've frequently scanned soft or thin BW negs as color
| (with Acer's many film-type choices, you can pick them for contrast) and
| then discarded the color information. It works well, especially for the
| I used to shoot Tri-X.
Not my idea, though - it comes from Dan Margulis, Professional Photoshop 5
through 6, chapter 13.
| I do, however, think that BWs should be stored as BW files. You can always
| add a tone of your choice later, if you want to, and the contrast is
| in straight BW. But that may just be a vestige of my Commercial Art
| "upbringing," and I could be soaking wet, here! ;-)
I'm just an amateur so you have the experience, but I think it depends on
the archive method or purpose and workflow- my recommendation to archive or
store in color is based on the "save the raw scan data" methodology which is
what I use - CD-Rs are cheap, and I can save the original scan as well as
the finished product. I always believe I can do a better job for the
finished result in a year, or 5 years later if I ever want to do so.
If the resulting BW file turns out excellently and the user doesn't
anticipate ever needing the 'raw data' again, then that may well be the one