digital photo of old photos

oldshovel80 · 05-21-2007, 04:11 PM

have any of you ever taken a photo of old photos using a dslr and what kind of quality does it have? i have a bunch of old family photos that i need to copy for other family members. thought i could use my k100d for this , what are your thoughts on this? thanks very much

dwinnert · 05-21-2007, 04:25 PM

Personally I would just get a scanner...

bdavis · 05-21-2007, 04:35 PM

It can be done, but is there some reason you don't want to batch scan the photos on a flatbed scanner? If you don't have one, you could head to a copy shop like Kinkos.

If you want to do a good job of it:
Get a tripod. You can fasten the photo to the wall or place it on a flat surface. Make sure the camera is level, the photo is perfectly perpendicular to the camera, and the photo is centered in the frame. You'll want to use a fairly long focal length to minimize distortions and shoot at f/8 or smaller to maximize depth of field. If you've got a lot of photos to shoot, mark out the frame in the picture on your surface of choice with some painters tape.

Use a cable, or wireless shutter release, as well as mirror lock-up.

I would get a good light (natural sun through a window, Ott-light) unless you are a flash-wiz, and set white balance manually. A polarizing filter can help cut the reflections and glare off of a glossy photo.

A google search on document photography will bring up more tips.

PDL · 05-21-2007, 05:31 PM

There are many places to investigate the photographing of documents (that's what a photo is after all) - there are old books on how to do this using film cameras too. One technique was to use the flat bed off of your enlarger and a set of photo lamps set at 45 degrees to the document. You can do the same thing with your tripod. Just be sure to adequately correct the white balance -- e.g. shoot a 18% grey card for exposure (save the image) shoot the 90% "other side" of the grey card (use it for custom white balance) - save both images for use in your PP software to determine what the white point is and grey point is.

I agree with bdavis - use a tripod or something that will not shake during the exposure. Use the lowest ISO you have - Shoot in RAW for latitude - watch out for lens barrel distortions etc. - Just like she says.

That said - I had my son scan two B&W images on his el-cheapo scanner and the results were great --- One was a 8x10 print and the other was a 5x7 print - both came out nice and I was able to fix water spots, scratches and dust (kids -just do not understand they should clean the glass on the scanner ---- what are you going to do) on both images. They have very high pixel counts - and I can actually do a little PP on them to make the exposure more or less to my liking. Once I get off my vertical smile and break out the 4x5 - I will have him scan the negatives so I can play with the images digitally too. You can get a reasonable flat bed scanner for not too hefty of a price, but if you have a large number of slides --- how about getting a slide copier and going that way. Something I have thought about - I even have the slide copier --- hummm.

PDL

WMBP · 05-21-2007, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by oldshovel80

have any of you ever taken a photo of old photos using a dslr and what kind of quality does it have? i have a bunch of old family photos that i need to copy for other family members. thought i could use my k100d for this , what are your thoughts on this? thanks very much

Have you tried this yourself yet? Try it, you might like it. I've taken a fair number of photos of photos in this fashion, with satisfactory results. Truth be told, the result is sometimes as good or better than the original, in part because I can do some tweaking and cleaning up on the computer.

The suggestions made previously are all excellent advice. A scanner is definitely a better tool for this job than a camera. And if you're going to try it with a camera, there are lots of things you can do to get better results.

But the question we don't know the answer to is, how high are your standards? You might have a choice here between Best Possible Result, and Good Enough Result. If you can get the originals nice and flat, and if you can get good light and at the same time avoid glare, and if you can find a perspective that gives you a properly proportioned photo (in other words, if you can photograph more or less straight on, and from far enough away that the sides of the photo look straight), you may find that you can take photos of old photos that will be good enough for your purposes.

Let me say it again: a scanner is definitely better. But if you don't have a scanner, and you aren't doing this work for the national archive, then don't run out and buy a scanner until you've spent 10 minutes at least taking a crack at it with your camera.

Will

chedoy · 05-21-2007, 07:17 PM

I've tried it. Camera is far faster, bit it's easier to get better results with a scanner. I had about 4 dozen bw and color snapshots that were 30 years old to copy. I ended up loading 6 at a time in the scanner, and cropping them out with software.

If you go camera, make do with a tripod, some way of holding the photo flat, and even lighting.

little laker · 05-21-2007, 11:37 PM

I would never pay their asking price for it, but Pentax actually makes a Copy Stand for such work.
Here's a pic of 1 from B&H

They're asking $1260.00

Personally I think that you can make your own easily enough and save $1000 or more

Plus they've been around for almost 40 years anyways, so you might be able to find 1 used.

oldshovel80 · 05-22-2007, 05:05 AM

thanks for all the advice. to ansewr your ?? i have about 300 photoes and some are bigger than my scanner bed, also my scanner is super slow, called kinko's they want like 2 to 3$ a scane. and no i havent tryed it yet but ithink ill build a so called work stand with lights and give it a try, thanks again for yall's imput on this matter ill let you know my results

EdZarts · 05-22-2007, 06:28 AM

I've done it, works pretty well. For my father in law's 50th b-day, my wife and I made him an album from his boxes and boxes of his old family photos from "the old country" (Russia).

I didn't have a flatbed scanner, so I set up a "copy stand" using a tripod and a small table. Lay the old photos on a piece of white foamcore, set white balance manually (lighting was some 3200k photofloods)

I used a 50mm macro lens, focused manually, and tripped the camera with a cable release.

one trick I did was to lay a piece of glass over the photo while I was shooting it, to keep it flat (these were *very* old photos, and most were warped and in poor condition) A polarizer cut out the glare.

yeah a scanner probably would have been better quality, but this way was more than enough, plus since I had several hundred photos to go through a scanner would have taken forever. With the wonders of post processing, I was also able to restore a lot of the shots that had been damaged/faded to a much *better* state than the originals.

(btw, he *loved* the album - we made photo "composites" in indesign, and then layed them out in aperture, and made an aperture book. it came out great!)

05-21-2007, 04:11 PM	#1
oldshovel80 New Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: south Posts: 20	digital photo of old photos have any of you ever taken a photo of old photos using a dslr and what kind of quality does it have? i have a bunch of old family photos that i need to copy for other family members. thought i could use my k100d for this , what are your thoughts on this? thanks very much

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Downloading digital photos without computer?	tmacdon	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	16	04-15-2010 08:09 AM
Compressing digital photos	albatross	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	14	01-17-2010 12:42 AM
My first digital photo	Oldphoto678	Post Your Photos!	2	02-18-2009 05:12 AM
Deleting Digital Photos	Leaf Fan	Photographic Technique	11	01-13-2008 05:07 AM
Digital projectors and negligence of vertical photos	Matjazz	Photographic Technique	5	05-11-2007 04:58 AM

05-21-2007, 04:25 PM	#2
dwinnert Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 107	Personally I would just get a scanner...

05-21-2007, 04:35 PM	#3
bdavis Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 'Burque, NM Posts: 309	It can be done, but is there some reason you don't want to batch scan the photos on a flatbed scanner? If you don't have one, you could head to a copy shop like Kinkos. If you want to do a good job of it: Get a tripod. You can fasten the photo to the wall or place it on a flat surface. Make sure the camera is level, the photo is perfectly perpendicular to the camera, and the photo is centered in the frame. You'll want to use a fairly long focal length to minimize distortions and shoot at f/8 or smaller to maximize depth of field. If you've got a lot of photos to shoot, mark out the frame in the picture on your surface of choice with some painters tape. Use a cable, or wireless shutter release, as well as mirror lock-up. I would get a good light (natural sun through a window, Ott-light) unless you are a flash-wiz, and set white balance manually. A polarizing filter can help cut the reflections and glare off of a glossy photo. A google search on document photography will bring up more tips.

05-21-2007, 05:31 PM	#4
PDL Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: PNW USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,128	There are many places to investigate the photographing of documents (that's what a photo is after all) - there are old books on how to do this using film cameras too. One technique was to use the flat bed off of your enlarger and a set of photo lamps set at 45 degrees to the document. You can do the same thing with your tripod. Just be sure to adequately correct the white balance -- e.g. shoot a 18% grey card for exposure (save the image) shoot the 90% "other side" of the grey card (use it for custom white balance) - save both images for use in your PP software to determine what the white point is and grey point is. I agree with bdavis - use a tripod or something that will not shake during the exposure. Use the lowest ISO you have - Shoot in RAW for latitude - watch out for lens barrel distortions etc. - Just like she says. That said - I had my son scan two B&W images on his el-cheapo scanner and the results were great --- One was a 8x10 print and the other was a 5x7 print - both came out nice and I was able to fix water spots, scratches and dust (kids -just do not understand they should clean the glass on the scanner ---- what are you going to do) on both images. They have very high pixel counts - and I can actually do a little PP on them to make the exposure more or less to my liking. Once I get off my vertical smile and break out the 4x5 - I will have him scan the negatives so I can play with the images digitally too. You can get a reasonable flat bed scanner for not too hefty of a price, but if you have a large number of slides --- how about getting a slide copier and going that way. Something I have thought about - I even have the slide copier --- hummm. PDL

05-21-2007, 06:15 PM	#5
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by oldshovel80 have any of you ever taken a photo of old photos using a dslr and what kind of quality does it have? i have a bunch of old family photos that i need to copy for other family members. thought i could use my k100d for this , what are your thoughts on this? thanks very much Have you tried this yourself yet? Try it, you might like it. I've taken a fair number of photos of photos in this fashion, with satisfactory results. Truth be told, the result is sometimes as good or better than the original, in part because I can do some tweaking and cleaning up on the computer. The suggestions made previously are all excellent advice. A scanner is definitely a better tool for this job than a camera. And if you're going to try it with a camera, there are lots of things you can do to get better results. But the question we don't know the answer to is, how high are your standards? You might have a choice here between Best Possible Result, and Good Enough Result. If you can get the originals nice and flat, and if you can get good light and at the same time avoid glare, and if you can find a perspective that gives you a properly proportioned photo (in other words, if you can photograph more or less straight on, and from far enough away that the sides of the photo look straight), you may find that you can take photos of old photos that will be good enough for your purposes. Let me say it again: a scanner is definitely better. But if you don't have a scanner, and you aren't doing this work for the national archive, then don't run out and buy a scanner until you've spent 10 minutes at least taking a crack at it with your camera. Will

05-21-2007, 07:17 PM	#6
chedoy Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 143	I've tried it. Camera is far faster, bit it's easier to get better results with a scanner. I had about 4 dozen bw and color snapshots that were 30 years old to copy. I ended up loading 6 at a time in the scanner, and cropping them out with software. If you go camera, make do with a tripod, some way of holding the photo flat, and even lighting.

05-21-2007, 11:37 PM	#7
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	I would never pay their asking price for it, but Pentax actually makes a Copy Stand for such work. Here's a pic of 1 from B&H They're asking $1260.00 Personally I think that you can make your own easily enough and save $1000 or more Plus they've been around for almost 40 years anyways, so you might be able to find 1 used.

05-22-2007, 05:05 AM	#8
oldshovel80 New Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: south Posts: 20 Original Poster	thanks for all the advice. to ansewr your ?? i have about 300 photoes and some are bigger than my scanner bed, also my scanner is super slow, called kinko's they want like 2 to 3$ a scane. and no i havent tryed it yet but ithink ill build a so called work stand with lights and give it a try, thanks again for yall's imput on this matter ill let you know my results

05-22-2007, 06:28 AM	#9
EdZarts Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 26	I've done it, works pretty well. For my father in law's 50th b-day, my wife and I made him an album from his boxes and boxes of his old family photos from "the old country" (Russia). I didn't have a flatbed scanner, so I set up a "copy stand" using a tripod and a small table. Lay the old photos on a piece of white foamcore, set white balance manually (lighting was some 3200k photofloods) I used a 50mm macro lens, focused manually, and tripped the camera with a cable release. one trick I did was to lay a piece of glass over the photo while I was shooting it, to keep it flat (these were very old photos, and most were warped and in poor condition) A polarizer cut out the glare. yeah a scanner probably would have been better quality, but this way was more than enough, plus since I had several hundred photos to go through a scanner would have taken forever. With the wonders of post processing, I was also able to restore a lot of the shots that had been damaged/faded to a much better state than the originals. (btw, he loved the album - we made photo "composites" in indesign, and then layed them out in aperture, and made an aperture book. it came out great!)