Re: filmscanners: Scanner resolution &File Sizes (& workflow)

[RogerMillerPhoto@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/22/2001 6:20:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
ktrout@hotmail.com writes:


> Rafe wrote:
>
> >35 mm images are about 60 Mbytes (24 bit color.)
> >645 images are about 160-170 Mbytes (24 bit color.)
>
> That stands to reason, given the larger size. I'm wondering if there is a 
> program that would save both a TIFF and a much smaller JPEG file to HD, and 
> index them according film strip, date scanned and frame#. Then one could 
> select the best TIFFs and dump the weak ones, but still have good 
> references 
> for future work.
>
> If there isn't, it's just an idea and I don't believe too thoroughly in 
> "Intellectual Property"--so feel free to run with it, anyone. If I were a 
> better programmer, I'd start on it tomorrow, and wouldn't have mentioned it 
> today. (I might not believe in IP, but I'm not stupid, either! ;-) )
>
> Best regards--LRA


There are probably a number of programs out there that will allow you to do 
what you are proposing.  It's just a matter of locating them.  Personally, I 
use a rather simple method of managing my digital photos that doesn't require 
any special software and is suited to my needs.  I'm sure there are better 
and faster methods, but the following workflow and method works for me and 
might give some ideas to others who are developing their own system or 
workflow:

I don't scan anymore than I have to.  I scan mostly 35 mm slides and they 
remain in their original box except during the actual scan, so I don't have 
the dust problems that others on this list complain about.  I don't leave 
scans on my hard drive any longer than I have to (it's surprising how fast 
even an 80 gig drive will fill up if you don't purge it often).  I transfer 
files from the hard drive to CD as soon as possible (as protection against a 
crash and to allow for disc purging) and I make CDs only if I anticipate 
needing to work with that image again (if I guess wrong, I can always 
re-scan).  I store images in psd format, not tif or jpg, and at their full 
uncompressed resolution.  These files are never stored as sharpened images 
and Photoshop annotations are added when useful.  Each slide and its digital 
file is give a name that includes the date it was processed, the roll number, 
and the frame number (for example, "28Mar00 R06 F34").  The date and frame 
number are already stamped on the slide by the processor and I write the roll 
number on the slide when I scan it.  Note that I use two digit roll and frame 
numbers (R06, not R6) so that they will sort properly.  The date could be 
written in a different format for better sorting too (000328 for 28Mar00, for 
example) but that's not necessary for my applications.  

All images for a given job that I want to "archive" on CD are also copied to 
a "proof sheet" file using Photoshop to create that file.  That file is 
designed to print on 8.5 x 11 inch paper and each image on it is 2 inches 
high.  I can sometimes get nearly 50 images on one proof sheet because I crop 
tightly around the model and sometimes even "knockout" the model from the 
background.  The entire proof sheet file is heavily sharpened, even if it 
messes up the skin tones.  Each image on the proof sheet has the roll number 
and frame number printed next to it and the date and any brief notes, 
customer name, etc., are printed only once somewhere else on the proof sheet. 
 Every image copied to a CD also has its associated proof sheet copied to the 
same CD.  I print one copy of each proof sheet for my records and sometimes 
an additional one for the customer.  I also print a word document listing the 
file names for each CD.  By the way, creating the proof sheet is the most 
labor intensive part of the process and the area that could use some software 
automation.  But, for me, the software would have to be optimized to get as 
many cropped and knocked out images as possible on a single proof sheet.  
That's something no commercially available program probably does, but I'd be 
happy to share royalties if someone wanted to write such a probram.

The result of my work flow is that I can keep a fairly clean hard drive and I 
have a hard copy of a proof sheet for every important image.  I, or my 
customer, can use the proof sheet to readily identify and locate a given 
slide or its CD file by using the file/slide name shown on the proof sheet.  
Some people might prefer to keep a copy of the proof sheet on their hard 
drive, but I prefer to purge it and use the hard copy version instead.  By 
the way, unlike others on this list, I don't consider CDs as archival storage 
due to their relatively high failure rate and prefer to rely on the original 
slides themselves as the archival storage media.  CDs are a convinience, but 
are not likely to last as long as the original slide.