Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaRide  it should arrive today at my house. |
How have things gone so far?
I bought a scanner a few years ago so I could convert my old photos to a digital format. I didn't get very far because the process was time-consuming and the results were not as good as I'd hoped.
I did find that the results from scanning the negative were better than the print - which does make sense.
GW mentioned that one would need a highly precise scanner to accurately reproduce an image from a negative. My scanner seemed to do a pretty good job for me... and that was ~7 years ago. Certainly a new unit should be
at least as good as that.
Next, if you scan the print you will inevitably transfer its imperfections. What happens when you make a copy of a copy? Then imagine copying (printing) it again. Flaws like creases, discoloration, paper texture, or errors imparted by the creation of that first print could be carried right along into your new file.
Scanning from the negative might create a considerably bigger file, but so what? Do you have no way to store the files on CD/DVD? Is your drive running low on space and you have a lot of photos to do? Unless those apply to you, that should not be a limitation.
I would say the primary consideration should be your plans for or use of the photos. Will you want to print them again later or keep them on your computer? If you might want to print them again, scan the negative; if you will only view them on the computer, it doesn't matter because your monitor's resolution is comparatively low anyway.