Welcome, Guest. Please login or register for free.
Did you miss your activation email?
Sunday 12 October 08 19:08 BST (UK)
Welcome Home Help Shop Search Calendar Login Register
Search Images 

Online
 
  First Name(s)

Last Name

 
News: Ad: New! FULL 1841 Census: England - Isle of Man - Wales  - Channel Islands Now online. No missing counties.

+  RootsChat.Com
|-+  General
| |-+  Photograph Restoration & Dating. Conservation (Moderators: deadants, PrueM)
| | |-+  Correctly scanned?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Correctly scanned?  (Read 602 times)
adee7
RootsChat Veteran
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 816


Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Correctly scanned?
« on: Monday 25 June 07 20:36 BST (UK) »

I have studied the tutorials, and posted pictures, but one question remains.  Using my Canon scanner, I set mode to colour; quality to 600dpi; measurement.  With those settings, there is no preview before the scan.

If I check 'use the scanner driver for advanced settings', there is a preview.

My question is -- Does the scanner then use my settings?  Can you tell by looking at my recent posting of Great Grandfather 1890s?

Regards,    Kathleen
Logged

England and Belfast - GOFF, GOUGH, MATHERS, MOXHAM/MOXAM,  OSMOND, PHILLIPS, WINDER, WYKES

Scotland - JOHNSTON, DORWARD, KIDD, KYD, RAMSAY, RAE

Canada - DeWOLFE, HALLADAY, HASKINS, HICOCK, JOHNSTON, OLD/OLDS
Gadget
RootsChat Marquessate
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 17502



WWW
Re: Correctly scanned?
« Reply #1 on: Monday 25 June 07 20:48 BST (UK) »

Hi Kathleen

It is scanned in colour but it's 300 dpi according to my software.

Gadget
Logged

Website: www.ancestral-tales.co.uk



My main Surname interests are on the Surname Interests Table  http://surname.rootschat.com/ and my website (above)

Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk
adee7
RootsChat Veteran
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 816


Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Re: Correctly scanned?
« Reply #2 on: Monday 25 June 07 21:08 BST (UK) »

Hi Gadget,

So, I'd better do without the preview and work with my own settings, I guess.

Would you suggest that I post this one again?

Kathleen
Logged

England and Belfast - GOFF, GOUGH, MATHERS, MOXHAM/MOXAM,  OSMOND, PHILLIPS, WINDER, WYKES

Scotland - JOHNSTON, DORWARD, KIDD, KYD, RAMSAY, RAE

Canada - DeWOLFE, HALLADAY, HASKINS, HICOCK, JOHNSTON, OLD/OLDS
Gadget
RootsChat Marquessate
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 17502



WWW
Re: Correctly scanned?
« Reply #3 on: Monday 25 June 07 21:21 BST (UK) »

It's not just the resolution but also the jpg. compression and I can't tell what that is on yours.  It's very small and is badly pixellated at 2 x size. I think, if I were you, I'd re scan.

Gadget
Logged

Website: www.ancestral-tales.co.uk



My main Surname interests are on the Surname Interests Table  http://surname.rootschat.com/ and my website (above)

Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk
adee7
RootsChat Veteran
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 816


Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Re: Correctly scanned?
« Reply #4 on: Monday 25 June 07 21:31 BST (UK) »

Thanks Gadget,  I'll work at it some more, though I'm not sure what you mean by 'the jpg compression'.  I didn't set anything for compression.

Why is it that just when we think we have something figured out, we don't? Huh

Kathleen
Logged

England and Belfast - GOFF, GOUGH, MATHERS, MOXHAM/MOXAM,  OSMOND, PHILLIPS, WINDER, WYKES

Scotland - JOHNSTON, DORWARD, KIDD, KYD, RAMSAY, RAE

Canada - DeWOLFE, HALLADAY, HASKINS, HICOCK, JOHNSTON, OLD/OLDS
Gadget
RootsChat Marquessate
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 17502



WWW
Re: Correctly scanned?
« Reply #5 on: Monday 25 June 07 21:36 BST (UK) »

Here's an example of it at 300% which is around the size that I might use for repairing it

JPg is what's called a 'Lossy' format. The information for the image that is part of each file can be reduced (compressed) to make it a smaller file size. When you save it as jpg there should be a slider (in PS) or an Options button in PSP that gives you the chance to have a High quality large image (not much compression) or a lower quality smaller image (lots of compression).  The image can still be at 600 or 300 dpi but if it's compressed it is not as clear.

Gadget


* Katheg01.jpg (70.83 KB, 490x357 - viewed 288 times.)
Logged

Website: www.ancestral-tales.co.uk



My main Surname interests are on the Surname Interests Table  http://surname.rootschat.com/ and my website (above)

Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk
adee7
RootsChat Veteran
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 816


Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Re: Correctly scanned?
« Reply #6 on: Monday 25 June 07 21:49 BST (UK) »

Thanks Gadget,

Now, with high hopes, I'll post the new one.

Regards,    Kathleen
Logged

England and Belfast - GOFF, GOUGH, MATHERS, MOXHAM/MOXAM,  OSMOND, PHILLIPS, WINDER, WYKES

Scotland - JOHNSTON, DORWARD, KIDD, KYD, RAMSAY, RAE

Canada - DeWOLFE, HALLADAY, HASKINS, HICOCK, JOHNSTON, OLD/OLDS
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »


[Copyright] [Free RootsChat Webspace] [Your Surname Interests] [Shrink Link] [About Us] [Terms of Use]
All Census Lookups are Crown Copyright, National Archives for academic and non-commercial research purposes only
RootsChat.com cannot be held responsible directly or indirectly for the messages or content posted by others. Inline images in messages are the copyright of the respective linked sites.
RootsChat.com, Europa House, Bury, Lancashire, BL9 5BT
0.282:20