Author Topic: Correctly scanned?  (Read 2396 times)

Offline adee7

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
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
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

Offline Gadget

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 57,138
    • View Profile
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
Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and GROS - www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk

***Restorers - Please do not use my restores without my permission. Thanks***

Offline adee7

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
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
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

Offline Gadget

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 57,138
    • View Profile
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
Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and GROS - www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk

***Restorers - Please do not use my restores without my permission. Thanks***


Offline adee7

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
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? ???

Kathleen
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

Offline Gadget

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 57,138
    • View Profile
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
Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and GROS - www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk

***Restorers - Please do not use my restores without my permission. Thanks***

Offline adee7

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
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
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