Textured originals

[kathleen]

sally,

i know there'd be keen interest in your results.

to post it, just see beneath the message section of "post reply" where it says attach file; click browse and chose your file; just be sure it is <102400 bytes.

eagerly awaiting your post.

[Sally]

Here is how I get rid of noise when scanning a textured photo. The original was a postcard size and a bit curled. I dampened it in order to flatten it and discovered dampening also got rid of most of the noise. I’m 63 and these papers were around when I was printing negatives before the days when colour became so popular.

Always try out an unimportant corner. Some older papers will flake off when handles this way. Sally Cowell

[Ed_L]

Wow Sally! That worked out pretty well! Thanks for sharing the tip. As always, be cautious when trying something like this.

Ed

[kathleen]

thanks sally. i am sure gonna try it, got a drawer full of meshy ones. messy meshies.

[Mike]

Well now that the xmas rush is over and santa has gone home for another year, I have some time to devote to discussions such as these.
We have been copying photos for about 40 years and usually we use the following:
Double polarized light, thats 2 lights with polorizing filters over both lites (IN THE SAME PLANE) and a polarizing filter over the camera lens. (this alone will increase the contrast of the print and will get rid of any silvering) An SLR type camera so you can see the reflections disappear as you turn the lens filter. Some type of stand for the camera, copy stands are really neat, but some tripods can be used. If you are using film, then you need to find a good film/developer combination. Regular BW films do not work to good especially if the photos contrast is already low. We used Kodak TechPan with Dektol paper developer for years. Ultra fine grain, fast and you could drive the DlogE curve almost vertical if you wanted to.
Since we started using digital, we have found that the results can be a little flat, but the curves in PS do a great job of correcting that and its faster than having to do a reshoot.
For the various textures of paper, starting the lites at a 45 degree angle and then moving them around a bit usually takes care of the little reflections. However for that print whose surface looks like a coblestone street, then the pan of water is highly recommended. In fact try two pans, the first takes off the excess dirt, the secound to photograph in. Do get the owners permission first!
If you do not have a digital camera, then I would suggest checking with your local photo studios to see if they have the equipment and knowledge to do the job for you. I do this every once in awhile for someone, sometimes we just do a trade out instead of $.
Using different color filters on a bw original is the way one removes colored stains, and with film can be used to increase contrast on prints where the image is nearly invisible. I have not had a chance to try this with digital yet.
Sorry for the length, but thought I could add something to the thread.
Thanks, Mike

[Sally]

Thanks Mike,

You explained the 2 polarising filters well. I hadn't thought of a digital camera for picture capture.

The truth is I don't have one, only the old way of copy with a twin lens camera and a bowl of water, or damp the print before I put it on the flat bed scanner. (for the textured surface)

I’m very familiar with the paper type, but I always test a corner first.

Sally

[wcook]

I tried the decracks action that I got from this site on some textured scans that I did recently. It worked much better than anything else I have tried. The texture was not completely eliminated but it faded so that it was just barely noticeable. WC

[Jill]

I just wanted to add what has worked for me. I have best results by taking a digital picture of the original. I do the same as Vikki, set up in natural light with a solid surface and use my remote control for the camera so I don't jiggle/blur. I use a 2 mega pixel camera with the flash off. I also used this for a picture someone brought me that was glued into a piece of driftwood. 100 year old pic of her Dad...was a tiny picture and I got to print up much larger for her and she was so happy. I posted a result of that pic in the thread > Restoration, Retouching, and Manipulation > PSP/ Photoshop Monitor<

[Jim Conway]

Not a suggestion but just a question, have any of you ever used "dulling sprays" before you scan?

Our (traditional) copy setup includes a Colortran light setup that takes care of most of the glare along with a polarizing setup as needed so I don't usually have any problem, however, some textures can still show "burn" reflections and in those cases I'll revert to an old trick studios use when you are photographing mirroring objects by using a removable dulling spray - Krylon No 1310.

It can be taken off as soon as you finish the job. No comments about age testing and/or long term effects if any on the originals, I've never tested it for that - nor has anyone else that I know of but it's removable with water and such products are seldom harmful to photographs. (We get an "ok to spray" authorization from the customers if it appears that it will be necessary)

I'd test it myself but as some of you already know, I don't consider digital work my long suit and wouldn't know if there are other ways that will do just as well or better.

Jim Conway

[Lampy]

Hi

I don't have any personal experience with dulling spray but know an objects conservator who has run into big problems with the spray being used on silver objects. The objects formed little spots where the dulling spray was and tarnished at those locations. I mention it only because it could be a problem for photographs being that silver is also involved.

My thought is avoid if possible (especially on older photos with cracks/losses etc.that can be hard to clean) and if not make sure it is removed completely after you're finished.

As Jim mentioned a good lighting set up and polarizers do the trick 95% of the time.

--Heather
www.tudhope.net