I recently picked up a number of old photos of my family from an overseas museum which kindly scanned them for me to disk but it now appears that they were badly scanned - as if through glass or another layer which has created an uneven effect. As rank amateur of Photoshop 6 I am stumped as to how to fix these precious photos. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Lena

A couple of questions -- are these the original files you got from the museum, or have you resized and/or compressed them before posting here? If these aren't the originals, can you tell us (a) what file format the originals were in, (b) what size they are (pixel count) (c) what size the files are (in KB)? The files as you posted them here have very very bad JPEG compression artifacts in them (all those little squares), and I'm trying to work out if that's the problem you have with the originals or just a side-effect of your resizing the photos for posting here.

If the JPEG artifacts are in the originals, then you'll be able to improve them, either in Photoshop alone or using a free utility like NeatImage, but you're not going to get anything close to the original quality because just too much information has been lost.

Let us know about the questions above and I'm sure between us we'll be able to make a big improvement, anyway...

Dear Leah,

unfortunately the files I have attached are the original format straight from the CD Rom that I received from the museum.

The files are JPEG (JFIF 1.0) and the sizes are 11.82kb & 13.22kb.

Given that they are badly scanned, what can you suggest?

Regards,

Lena

I had a horrible feeling that that would be the case (I am actually quite shocked that any professional institution would save files at this level of JPEG compression). Neat Image (http://www.neatimage.com) often does a reasonable job of reducing JPEG artifacts (it has a combination of profile settings designed for that), but I've only got that at home, so I'll check that out this evening and see what it can do...

Dear Leah,

the day I picked up the CD from the Museum (in Poland), the person who did the scanning for me said that there had been problems with the software the museum was using and this was the first time he had got it to work - obviously not very well and I don't know what software or hardware the museum was using. I was just grateful to get the images on CD.

Thank you for offering to find out the information for me. I await your reply.

Regards,

Lena

I've had an attempt - using the JPEG artifact reduction filter in PaintShop Pro and then adjusting contrast, blurring selectively, smudging some of the worst of the remaining jaggies, etc. in Photoshop.

This is what I've got so far (I will still have a go with NeatImage later, though).

Hi Lena,

Welcome to RP. I think Leah has done about all that can be done with the poor quality images. Is it possible that they might re-scan them to 300 dpi or more, then send them to you? Depending on your setup and theirs, it might be possible to send a higher resolution than the original scan through e-mail. If not, you could offer to pay for shipping.

Ed

re-scan them to 300 dpi or moreMore importantly, also to save them either as a TIF or as a maximum-quality, minimum-compression JPEG.

... and on the "all that can be done", I lay you 5 to 1 that when Flora gets her hands on them she'll come up with some sort of miracle!

More importantly, also to save them either as a TIF or as a maximum-quality, minimum-compression JPEG.

Good call!

... and on the "all that can be done", I lay you 5 to 1 that when Flora gets her hands on them she'll come up with some sort of miracle!

I wouldn't doubt that either. But I know I'm not the one to perform such miracles. :)

Ed

I've played around with NeatImage and I think actually PaintShop Pro did a better job. So the versions posted earlier really are the best I can do :sad:

Dear Leah,

many thanks for all your help. I think given that I have 22 images in the same state I will have to contact the museum and hope that they can rescan the images - this time the right way.

Again, many thanks,

Lena

Hi everybody,

.....sorry .... no miracles!!!! :D

Funnily enough, when first opening the originals in PS, checking the size, I notice that they came at 300ppi....

I have to admit that for what dpi and ppi are concerned, my understanding is kind of 'blurry' .... (I'm being very kind on myself!!! :D ) ... but I was convinced that at that resolution the pictures should have been 'crispy clear' .... Obviously I was wrong... or, looking at the size Lena mentioned "11.82kb & 13.22kb" , they might have been correctly scanned, but 'monstrously' compressed when saved!!

Lena,

I agree with Leah and Ed about trying to get them to rescan the pictures for you, asking that they be saved ".... either as a TIF or as a maximum-quality, minimum-compression JPEG. " as Leah pointed out.

I had a go at your picture .... and honestly, I'm not sure the result is worth the effort .... particularly thinking about 22 pictures in the same conditions...
... but just in case there should be problems with the rescanning ....

:wavey:

[QUOTE=Flora]Hi everybody,

.....sorry .... no miracles!!!!QUOTE]

And then she performs one. :D

Ed

Thanks Ed.... ! :blush:

(...still kind of 'blocky' ... though....)

Dear Flora,

you did an amazing job - thanks. I think given that I have so many images to deal with I will contact the museum to get them rescanned as per suggestions.

Again, thanks for your efforts.

Lena