Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: Rescans and archiving
This is a dilemma you and others will be facing each time there is a
technological improvement in image acquisition and storage.
Is it worth rebuilding your basement when you put an addition on your
home? Well, that depends... will it support the extra weight? Is it
crumbling? Could it be designed better a second time around?
Verbatim disks are supposed to be fairly stable. No one knows for sure
which will last the longest, because they all are being testing with
accelerated aging models, which do not reflect real world conditions.
Are the scans coming from your new scanner so improved that it worth
your time to rescan them? Certainly, it is likely the 2900 dpi the
Nikon provides is closer to 2900 dpi than the 2400 dpi reported by the
HP scanner, so its more likely a 30-40% increase rather than 20%.
My approach to this would be to ask why you archived them on disk to
begin with. Is it to protect the images from loss due to the degrading
of the film over the next 20-30 years? Is it so you can print from the
If it is for printing, I'd only rescan those images that you plan on
reprinting, especially in a larger format. If you are trying to protect
the images from loss due to film damage, either make sure the film is
well stored and can be scanned at a later date when needed, (hey, you
might have a 4000 dpi or 6000 dpi scanner next time), or if you don't
think the film will survive, scan it now with the best scanner you can
afford, and put it on the best rated disks for longevity.
Personally, I trust my film to maintain most of its integrity for many
years to come, so I'm not panicking to get everything on CD-R.
> I have a question for the group.
> I recently upgraded from a original Photosmart scanner for 35mm film to a
> Nikon LS-IV scanner. I recently scanned about 100-200 images from a trip
> and then changed scanners and monitors. The Photosmart was 2400DPI scanner
> and teh Nikon was a 2900DPI scanner.
> This past weekend I opened up some of the old scanned images and was
> looking at them and noticed that there is a big difference in the scans
> compared to new scans I have done with the Nikon scanner.
> Question is.. IT is worth my time to rescan all those images again....
> It will take some time to do since I will have to fish them out again.
> Secondly, I have been burning my finished scans onto Verbatim CD-R discs.
> But I have read and been recommended recently that the Kodak Ultima CD-R 80
> are better for long term storage. Does anyone have a opinion on this?