If you have a few spare minutes...and want something to do...I am trying to restore a very old photo of myself as a baby...anyone want to take a crack? here is the original and then my first take...they are scanned polaroids...
For starters....it would improve it a lot if you don't scan it. Instead put it on a white piece of paper and photograph as close to it as you can. That will allow much more detail and better resolution.
For starters....it would improve it a lot if you don't scan it. Instead put it on a white piece of paper and photograph as close to it as you can. That will allow much more detail and better resolution.
hey..great idea. Now i..have to wait for my next trip to my grandmothers. :p
but it will sure make the process alot smoother of transfering all the old photo's.
For starters....it would improve it a lot if you don't scan it. Instead put it on a white piece of paper and photograph as close to it as you can. That will allow much more detail and better resolution.
That's a good tip Judi. My dad left a small trunk full of old family photos with me during his last visit, some going back into the late 1800's. I automatically thought of cleaning up the scanner to start working thru these. Glad I haven't started yet...I'll give your suggestion a go as well. :-)
For starters....it would improve it a lot if you don't scan it. Instead put it on a white piece of paper and photograph as close to it as you can. That will allow much more detail and better resolution.
I never considered this before. Thanks for the tip.
I tried to do something with it but it's too small. when I enlarged to see it better it was just way too pixelated. sorry. However, the picture idea sounds really cool I'm going to try it with some of mine. (I really hate scanning it takes too long:D)
For starters....it would improve it a lot if you don't scan it. Instead put it on a white piece of paper and photograph as close to it as you can. That will allow much more detail and better resolution.
Most scanners these days have sensors at an optical(non-interpolated) resolution 2400 to 4800/inch -- the file from a good scanner should be bigger than a digital photo. These photos don't have a huge dynamic range, so the scanner's moderate shortcoming in that area shouldn't matter.
It't also harder to get a perfectly square and evenly-lit image using a camera unless you use a copy stand specifically designed for photographic reproduction of documents.
Personally, I think a decent scanner is a far better way to digitize print collections; slides or negatives are a different matter ...
