A scanning challenge

[RobertHJones]

Beth,

I just now got around to reading this thread and I've seen a tutorial
dealing with removal of silvering or texture on old photographs. I haven't
tried it but it looks fairly simple so it's worth a try.

[url]http://www.retouchpro.com/tutorials/?m=show&id=58[/url]

If you try this, let us know if it worked.

Bob

[Peter Duniho]

"RobertHJones" <member@adobeforums.com> wrote in message
news:A3F980BDC003CC7C9554F86616A04AC1@in.webx.la2e afNXanI...

> I just now got around to reading this thread and I've seen a tutorial
> dealing with removal of silvering or texture on old photographs. [...]
>
> [url]http://www.retouchpro.com/tutorials/?m=show&id=58[/url]

Ooh...that's pretty cool. Sort of a "poor man's polarizing filter" (though
a poor man using it will have spent a lot more than a filter costs :) ).
The hardest part (using that technique in Elements) probably would be
getting the images registered with each other. One hopes the
auto-straighten feature would help with that.

I would also try scanning the photo rotated at 90 degrees and/or 270
degrees, using the techniques described to combine three or four scans
instead of two.

Now I wish I had some old silvered photographs to try that out on. Oh
well...

Pete

[Leen Koper]

Beth, a polariser probably won't work. The idea is OK, but if it is silver-and it probably is- polarisers don't work on metal surfaces.

Leen

[Schraven Robert]

Beth,

I've been reading this thread and from the start the following came to my mind. It may be a long shot.
Back in the 70's when you had the old xerox copier machines you could not copy a photo unless you put a plastic foil inbetween the image and the glassplate. That plastic foil (thin sheet in case I used the wrong word) had to have some grid on it. Even a matte (non see through or blurred) foil would do it. The image would come out well which is something that is still a mystery to me. However if you did not use the foil the image would be over exposed and unpleasant to look at.

May be you can pick up a foil at an arts and craft shop.

Robert

[Peter Duniho]

"Leen Koper" <leenkoper@zeelandnet.nl> wrote in message
news:2ccd7ffa.21@webx.la2eafNXanI...

> Beth, a polariser probably won't work. The idea is OK, but
> if it is silver-and it probably is- polarisers don't work on
> metal surfaces.

Thanks for bringing this up. I learned something new about polarization
today.

However, after doing some research, I believe that your statement about
polarizers and metallic surfaces is based on some slightly flawed reasoning.

The reason that polarizing filters won't help with glare from a metallic
surface is that the metallic surface, being conductive, does not polarize
the light being reflected. Non-conductive surfaces (such as water or glass)
do polarize the light being reflected, and thus a polarizing filter can
block that light.

However, in the scenario relating to Beth's problem and Chuck's suggestion,
there is no need for the metal surface to polarize the light. In fact, that
might even be counterproductive. A circular polarizing filter placed
between the light source and the image will polarize the light on its way to
the image, and the metallic surface will reflect the polarized light back
unchanged. Because of the way the circular polarizing filter is designed,
this polarized light will not make it back through the filter on the return
trip.

The only remaining question is what light WILL make it back, which I alluded
to in an earlier post. But assuming the polarized light striking the
non-shiny surfaces of the print is reflected in a more random manner, it may
well be the case (that is, I don't really know :) ) that it doesn't remain
polarized enough to be prevented from coming back to the scanner's optics.

Here's one of the web sites I turned up with Google:
[url]http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002BJf[/url]
There's more information about polarization in that thread than most of us
would need to know in a lifetime. :)

Pete

[Joe Henry1000]

Er...thanks Beth for bringing to my attention the fact that all the scan's of my older photo's have this "defect" and now I have to redo them all! ;-) I'm starting to realize that with all my starts, stops and do-overs this project will probably never be finished.

Back to the scanner I go.

Joe

[Julio Guerra]

How about putting one of the scanned photos on the challenge and seeing what the group can do to fix it and remove the problems and then posting the procedure used?

Just a thought

Julio

[Harold Delk]

Expanding on the "foil" idea; may I suggest trying a silk screen filter placed between the image and the light source. I've had fairly good luck with some older photos scanned in this manner. It tends to reduce the hotspots enough that they look normal. I've no clue as to why it works ... after many frustrating attempts to solve the same problem I happened upon one I had saved from an old copy machine and stuck a photo in the sleeve, dropped in on the scanner and it improved the image enough to make me happy. That's not always an easy thing to do according to my critics. <G> It may be worth a try ... no, I have no idea where to find another one, but perhaps an artist's supply shop or a local print shop could offer a clue. My wife is in the publishing business and offers the advice that these were often used by printers and older fax machines to reduce glare. She also mentioned that I should throw out a lot of "saved" clutter in my office ... so if I come across another one I'll be happy to send it your way.
Harold

[Beth Haney]

Wow, I go to bed at night, and look what I wake up to! Thanks, everybody! And, Joe - sorry guy. If I can ever come up with something that mitigates this effect, though, you'll thank me. :) I've made my way through several pictures like this, and it is possible to work with them, but it's horribly time consuming and often relies a little too much on one's artistic abilities. And this is one person who doesn't happen to have any of those.

Peter, I had the same thought about getting two images aligned when I read the tutorial. I'm still going to try it, even though the image used in the example was in pretty good shape compared to several of mine. We'll see how the technique works on pictures where the silvering effect is more widespread. The photo that kind of "pushed me over the edge" is one where the faces of the people were in shadows when the picture was taken, so that silvering is on their faces in addition to the background and clothing.

The idea of a silk screen filter is intriguing, too. Oh, my, the errand list for today keeps getting longer. I guess I better go get started.

[Beth Haney]

Report number one: The technique outlined on Retouchpro did improve the image but evidence of the silvering was still visible. I tried one set of horizontal scans and one set of vertical scans. The result was the same, so the direction in which the photo is scanned doesn't seem to matter. I then pushed my luck further and tried merging the "merged" vertical scans with the "merged" horizontal scans. No further progress. I've really gotta pry myself away from this computer for now, but later I'll try working with a photo that doesn't have quite as much of this stuff in it. It looks like this might work well for some photos.

[Patti Anderson]

I'm reading this thread with great interest and learning more than I need to know, I'm sure. :) I'm wondering though, Beth, what type of scanner and settings you did use? Did I miss this info somewhere?

Granted I am no professional, but it seems to me like we're making this much too complicated. Although...I have learned a lot and this forum seems to thrive on these type of discourses. I have an old Acer Prism scanner (MiraScan software) which has always done a very impressive job at scanning photos -- old and new. I've scanned everything from daguerreotypes and old sepia photos...to fabric with success.

I scanned a daguerreotype this morning, with obvious holographic (sp?) effects when you look at it from any angle other than straight on, but it scanned fine at 600 dpi without any special settings. RGB/600dpi/100%/no filter/no descreen. It had a lot of scratches and those seemed to show up very well!

Patti

[carl sutherland]

Beth

I am interested in the new Microtek 6800 scanner with the ICE technology that is supposed to help greatly with surface flaws in photos specifically mentioned are creases and dirt. I think I am going to buy one. If you have not settled your problem by then, if you sent me one of your most difficult ones I would try this technology if you wanted. Maybe somebody already has experience.

Carl

[Beth Haney]

Thanks, Carl. I might take you up on it. When I started this thread, I knew the issue was challenging to me, but I didn't realize the weird turns it would take. I was assuming - hoping! - that I had just missed an obvious setting or combination of settings that everybody else knew about but me. You know - like the first time you try to scan from a magazine or newspaper and run up against the moire effect, and then somebody tells you about the Descreen option.

I talked to a third person while I was out today, and he confirmed what the first two said and elaborated. Nobody but the pros can deal with this effectively. Yet. He says it's a known issue, and he's pretty sure somebody is working on some kind of consumer-oriented "fix", either software or a filtering device of some sort. More and more people are bringing photos in to his shop to have negatives made after they figure out they don't like the hassle of trying to scan and edit them at home.

In answer to your question, Patti - I don't consider myself exceptionally good at scanning issues, but I've done a quite a bit of it, too, and can usually get results that satisfy me. My equipment isn't state of the art, but it's certainly adequate, and my primary software has a full range of adjustments. If you've successfully gotten rid of this during the scanning stage, I'd really appreciate it if you'd let me know what settings you used, because I'm running out of combinations! And I'm serious! Heck - I'll hire you to scan them!

By the way, for whoever is interested: The cost of a 12 X 12 circular polarizing filter in my neighborhood is about $125, with tax. I didn't order one. :)