Paint Shop Pro support - Advice on scanning B & W photos

Author

Advice on scanning B & W photos

GSHATTERHAND

2005-06-06, 7:34 pm

I'll be scanning a great number of old black & white photos and
cleaning them up. In order to be able to work best with them in PSP 9,
I'm not certain if I should scan them as black & white, grey scale, or
just color.

The PSP manual reads "Black-and-white photos have no colors to correct.
Instead, use the Automatic Contrast Enhancement command to restore the
photograph."

OK, I understand how to do use contrast enhancement. And I realize
black-and-white photos have no colors to correct. But if I scan a
black-and-white photo as color, or use PSP to increase the color
depths, I've got millions of colors (according to "Image Information")
even if my photo still appears black-and-white on my monitor.

So is there any advantage to increasing color depth in a
black-and-white photo and having more PSP tools available? Or should I
just leave the images black-and-white from the start?

Also, when adjusting a black-and-white image, which tools are better?
ADJUST>BRIGHTNESS & CONTRAST>BRIGHTNESS/CONTRAST? Or ADJUST>AUTOMATIC
CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT which gives me the options of BIAS, STRENGTH and
APPEARANCE?

Any help from the kind and knowledgeable PSP experts who congregate
here will be deeply appreciated. : )

Marvin

2005-06-06, 7:34 pm

GSHATTERHAND wrote:
> I'll be scanning a great number of old black & white photos and
> cleaning them up. In order to be able to work best with them in PSP 9,
> I'm not certain if I should scan them as black & white, grey scale, or
> just color.

Grey scale. Just try a B/W scan, and you'll see why.
>
> The PSP manual reads "Black-and-white photos have no colors to correct.
> Instead, use the Automatic Contrast Enhancement command to restore the
> photograph."
>
> OK, I understand how to do use contrast enhancement. And I realize
> black-and-white photos have no colors to correct. But if I scan a
> black-and-white photo as color, or use PSP to increase the color
> depths, I've got millions of colors (according to "Image Information")
> even if my photo still appears black-and-white on my monitor.
>
> So is there any advantage to increasing color depth in a
> black-and-white photo and having more PSP tools available? Or should I
> just leave the images black-and-white from the start?

There is no color in the original, so scanning in color is just a waste of bytes.
>
> Also, when adjusting a black-and-white image, which tools are better?
> ADJUST>BRIGHTNESS & CONTRAST>BRIGHTNESS/CONTRAST? Or ADJUST>AUTOMATIC
> CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT which gives me the options of BIAS, STRENGTH and
> APPEARANCE?

I usually try the automatic contrast first. If I don't like the result, I undo and try
the manual adjustment. In fact, I usually use the One Step Photofix, then touch up that
result.

>
> Any help from the kind and knowledgeable PSP experts who congregate
> here will be deeply appreciated. : )
>

Trev

2005-06-06, 7:34 pm

"GSHATTERHAND" <gshatterhand@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1118066369.199145.71920@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I'll be scanning a great number of old black & white photos and
> cleaning them up. In order to be able to work best with them in PSP 9,
> I'm not certain if I should scan them as black & white, grey scale, or
> just color.
>
> The PSP manual reads "Black-and-white photos have no colors to correct.
> Instead, use the Automatic Contrast Enhancement command to restore the
> photograph."
>
> OK, I understand how to do use contrast enhancement. And I realize
> black-and-white photos have no colors to correct. But if I scan a
> black-and-white photo as color, or use PSP to increase the color
> depths, I've got millions of colors (according to "Image Information")
> even if my photo still appears black-and-white on my monitor.
>
> So is there any advantage to increasing color depth in a
> black-and-white photo and having more PSP tools available? Or should I
> just leave the images black-and-white from the start?
>
> Also, when adjusting a black-and-white image, which tools are better?
> ADJUST>BRIGHTNESS & CONTRAST>BRIGHTNESS/CONTRAST? Or ADJUST>AUTOMATIC
> CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT which gives me the options of BIAS, STRENGTH and
> APPEARANCE?
>
> Any help from the kind and knowledgeable PSP experts who congregate
> here will be deeply appreciated. : )
>

I would go 16 mill in case I wish to use a tool that will only work in 16
mill.
As for brightness and contrast I'm a histogram sort of person.

Porter

2005-06-06, 7:34 pm

"Marvin"
> GSHATTERHAND wrote:
and[color=darkred]
in PSP 9,[color=darkred]
scale, or[color=darkred]
>
> Grey scale. Just try a B/W scan, and you'll see why.
to correct.[color=darkred]
restore the[color=darkred]
realize[color=darkred]
scan a[color=darkred]
color[color=darkred]
Information")[color=darkred]
monitor.[color=darkred]
Or should I[color=darkred]
>
> There is no color in the original, so scanning in color is
just a waste of bytes.

One man's waste o' byte is another's better shot at a better
final. 16.7 million shades/colors/nuances versus a capped off
limited mere 256 colors? While I personally feel that much
beyond our first six/seven mil is probably excessive, and mostly
just showing off :) -> there are plenty of times when having
access to more than 256 shades and nuances just might be useful.

JoeB

2005-06-07, 7:40 pm

Marvin <physchem@cloud9.net> wrote in
news:11abq9oc4rir1c2@corp.supernews.com:

> Porter wrote:
mostly[color=darkred]
useful.[color=darkred]
> 256 shades is much more than the depth of tones in a B/W print.
Using
> even more is akin to "empty magnification".

I don't think that is incorrect. If you were to scan a B&W image
into PSP with the scanner set to Color, then go to Image>Count
Image Colors, you'll see that you get the number of unique colors
in the thousands. If you scan the image using the scanner's
Greyscale option and count colors, they will be 256 or less.
Increasing color depth on that image will not change this because
you didn't get all of the colors available when you scanned. In
an example scan I did, the "color" b&w scan is brighter on my
monitor than the greyscale one, showing over 23,000 unique
colors, and truer to the original in brightness, with whites
being much better than the greyscale scan.

I'm using the word "color" in this case to mean varying shades of
grey. Greyscale doesn't allow for more than 256 shades.

I don't really understand this stuff, so can only speculate that
scanning with the color option allows for the capture of more
subtle gradations of grey in the image. However, I suppose it
could be caused because there is a slight color cast (sepia?)
caused by image age that is being captured but that my eye
doesn't discern But there is a definite difference on how the
two scans look on the monitor.

If I desaturate the 16 mil image (saturation at -100) there is a
definite change to the image and it does look like a color cast
is being removed, but the image is still lighter than the
greyscale scan and whites are still good, but color count drops
to 241 (it is 228 in the greyscale scan).

So if the color scan is actually picking up a color cast, I'd
still opt for scanning at 16 mil because I can remove the color
cast with desaturation and have a result that is true to the
original on my monitor, which the greyscale scan isn't.

Somebody with actual technical knowledge might be able to explain
the various differences I've described above in a way I can
understand if they get the urge! :-)

Regards,

JoeB

Jeff

2005-06-08, 7:39 pm

Yes, I wish one of the experts would help us understand. It's an important
point.

--

Jeff Stevens
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam
jeff@stevens.com

"JoeB" <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns966E9D75A3A03JoeB@24.70.95.211...
> Marvin <physchem@cloud9.net> wrote in
> news:11abq9oc4rir1c2@corp.supernews.com:
>
> mostly
> useful.
> Using
>
> I don't think that is incorrect. If you were to scan a B&W image
> into PSP with the scanner set to Color, then go to Image>Count
> Image Colors, you'll see that you get the number of unique colors
> in the thousands. If you scan the image using the scanner's
> Greyscale option and count colors, they will be 256 or less.
> Increasing color depth on that image will not change this because
> you didn't get all of the colors available when you scanned. In
> an example scan I did, the "color" b&w scan is brighter on my
> monitor than the greyscale one, showing over 23,000 unique
> colors, and truer to the original in brightness, with whites
> being much better than the greyscale scan.
>
> I'm using the word "color" in this case to mean varying shades of
> grey. Greyscale doesn't allow for more than 256 shades.
>
>
> I don't really understand this stuff, so can only speculate that
> scanning with the color option allows for the capture of more
> subtle gradations of grey in the image. However, I suppose it
> could be caused because there is a slight color cast (sepia?)
> caused by image age that is being captured but that my eye
> doesn't discern But there is a definite difference on how the
> two scans look on the monitor.
>
> If I desaturate the 16 mil image (saturation at -100) there is a
> definite change to the image and it does look like a color cast
> is being removed, but the image is still lighter than the
> greyscale scan and whites are still good, but color count drops
> to 241 (it is 228 in the greyscale scan).
>
> So if the color scan is actually picking up a color cast, I'd
> still opt for scanning at 16 mil because I can remove the color
> cast with desaturation and have a result that is true to the
> original on my monitor, which the greyscale scan isn't.
>
> Somebody with actual technical knowledge might be able to explain
> the various differences I've described above in a way I can
> understand if they get the urge! :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> JoeB
>
>
>

Marvin

2005-06-08, 11:29 pm

JoeB wrote:
> Marvin <physchem@cloud9.net> wrote in
> news:11abq9oc4rir1c2@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
>
> mostly
>
>
> useful.
>
>
> Using
>
>
>
> I don't think that is incorrect. If you were to scan a B&W image
> into PSP with the scanner set to Color, then go to Image>Count
> Image Colors, you'll see that you get the number of unique colors
> in the thousands. If you scan the image using the scanner's
> Greyscale option and count colors, they will be 256 or less.
> Increasing color depth on that image will not change this because
> you didn't get all of the colors available when you scanned. In
> an example scan I did, the "color" b&w scan is brighter on my
> monitor than the greyscale one, showing over 23,000 unique
> colors, and truer to the original in brightness, with whites
> being much better than the greyscale scan.
>
> I'm using the word "color" in this case to mean varying shades of
> grey. Greyscale doesn't allow for more than 256 shades.
>
>
> I don't really understand this stuff, so can only speculate that
> scanning with the color option allows for the capture of more
> subtle gradations of grey in the image. However, I suppose it
> could be caused because there is a slight color cast (sepia?)
> caused by image age that is being captured but that my eye
> doesn't discern But there is a definite difference on how the
> two scans look on the monitor.

You are probably seeing artifacts from the scanning process.

>
> If I desaturate the 16 mil image (saturation at -100) there is a
> definite change to the image and it does look like a color cast
> is being removed, but the image is still lighter than the
> greyscale scan and whites are still good, but color count drops
> to 241 (it is 228 in the greyscale scan).
>
> So if the color scan is actually picking up a color cast, I'd
> still opt for scanning at 16 mil because I can remove the color
> cast with desaturation and have a result that is true to the
> original on my monitor, which the greyscale scan isn't.
>
> Somebody with actual technical knowledge might be able to explain
> the various differences I've described above in a way I can
> understand if they get the urge! :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> JoeB
>
>
>

JoeB

2005-06-08, 11:29 pm

Marvin <physchem@cloud9.net> wrote in news:11af30hqmspsrd1
@corp.supernews.com:

> JoeB wrote:
them[color=darkred]
grey[color=darkred]
off[color=darkred]
print.[color=darkred]
image[color=darkred]
colors[color=darkred]
because[color=darkred]
In[color=darkred]
of[color=darkred]
that[color=darkred]
the[color=darkred]

[color=darkred]
>
> You are probably seeing artifacts from the scanning process.
>

Do you mean the whole image looks lighter than the greyscale scan
because of artifacts? Or that what looks like a color cast is
caused by artifacts? I ask because, when desaturated and the
color cast is removed, the image is still lighter than the
greyscale scan and is also virtually true in lightness and
everything else to the original, while the greyscale scan is
darker.

Regards,

JoeB

[snipped for brevity]

Nil

2005-06-09, 4:38 am

On 08 Jun 2005, JoeB <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:Xns966FBE71EDF93JoeB@24.70.95.211:

> [snipped for brevity]

It was???

rumpledickskin

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

Scan the photo full color. Don't use brightness/contrast to adjust the
picture because it's way too harsh; instead, learn to use the
histogram for adjustments. You'll find better results after adjusting
a 16.7 million color picture than a 256 greysacle. I would not convert
it to 256 color afterwards. Looking at a "full color" b/w with the
eyedropper tool you'll probably find lots different shades of green
and an amount of light blues. Experiment.

GSHATTERHAND

2005-06-11, 7:27 pm

I found the replies to my original question very helpful. Thanks to
all.
GShatterhand

false_dmitrii@yahoo.com

2005-06-12, 11:21 pm

GSHATTERHAND wrote:
> I'll be scanning a great number of old black & white photos and
> cleaning them up. In order to be able to work best with them in PSP 9,
> I'm not certain if I should scan them as black & white, grey scale, or
> just color.
>
> The PSP manual reads "Black-and-white photos have no colors to correct.
> Instead, use the Automatic Contrast Enhancement command to restore the
> photograph."
>
> OK, I understand how to do use contrast enhancement. And I realize
> black-and-white photos have no colors to correct. But if I scan a
> black-and-white photo as color, or use PSP to increase the color
> depths, I've got millions of colors (according to "Image Information")
> even if my photo still appears black-and-white on my monitor.
>
> So is there any advantage to increasing color depth in a
> black-and-white photo and having more PSP tools available? Or should I
> just leave the images black-and-white from the start?

The moment the B&W starts fading to sepia, it's no longer just a B&W
image. :) A big advantage of scanning in color is that you can choose
between different color channels to see which comes closest to what the
photo "ought" to look like, or which has the least amount of fading.
Might also be handy for isolating any differently colored foreign
substances present on the photo surface.

For even more flexibility, you can play with the channel mixer with
"monochrome" checked until you find the most pleasing mix of image
contrast. There are probably 20 other ways to achieve the same result.
:)

Don't worry too much about losing the "millions of colors" when
switching to grayscale. When you choose color over grayscale, you have
three separate values instead of just one to measure for each pixel.
It's still only 256 levels per color, and if you split the channels to
HSL you're still only looking at 256 levels of "lightness", with the
remainder being Hue and Saturation (what we recognize as "color"). But
in the full-color original, every variance from pure neutral values
will likely show up as a unique color. What looks monochrome will
nonetheless have some amount of color variance in the real world
(whereas PSP's colorize function will create the 256-color image from a
grayscale that our common sense expects, since it's applying a single
color universally). And scanning will introduce some amount of random
fluctuation to each color channel (all those fancy sensors are still
real-world objects that react to temperature and power variance). All
those variations in color, however subtle, are just as unique (and use
as much storage space) as a wild rainbow of pixels; each pixel still
requires its own combination of red, green, and blue out of the 256
possible values for each. Thus, a "sepia" image becomes a wild array
of countless (not literally countless :) ) near-sepia values.

If a "color" B&W image has the right contrast, switching to grayscale
will just cut off your channel mixing options. It shouldn't have an
impact on your perception of the image before and after. The image
will be much smaller, and you can always switch back to 24-bit to run
filters. Or you can keep the desaturated image in 24-bit color and use
colorize to restore a uniform tint...might make for a smaller
compressed file than the full-color original.

I have wondered at times whether scanning B&W as 24-bit color can
function as a poor man's high-bit-depth equivalent--kind of what
Porter's implying. It makes intuitive sense. If true, it would offer
a wider latitude for accurate image adjustments (you could do more
without creating banding or posterization). But I don't know the math
behind it all, so I can't answer the question on my own. :(

To sum it up, there are advantages to scanning B&W as color and not too
many drawbacks to converting the final image to grayscale *if* it's
intended to be viewed as B&W/monochrome. If you're low on space,
either scan as B&W or scan as color and custom-convert to grayscale.
If not, scan as color and "archive" that way for more flexibility.
Then you can tinker around with a copy to your heart's content. :) (For
maximum future flexibility, scan as 16-bit-per-channel/48-bit, but then
you'll need something to convert it into PSP's native 24-bit
environment.)

Those are my impressions, anyway. I could be wrong. :)

You didn't ask, but I've seen a number of people recommend a maximum of
300dpi for print scans. This is *not* always sufficient for extracting
all the detail from a print. I've run old B&W photos through my Epson
4870 that were resolving more detail at 600dpi, 800dpi, and possibly
even 1200. This might be partly due to the flatbed's inherent softness
(if it's not delivering *true* 300dpi, going higher would help it cross
that particular theoretical threshold) but it's also likely that these
particular prints were of higher quality than typical modern consumer
color prints. If the goal is to capture as much information from the
originals as possible, it's well worth testing higher detail levels on
the sharpest prints of each series.

> Also, when adjusting a black-and-white image, which tools are better?
> ADJUST>BRIGHTNESS & CONTRAST>BRIGHTNESS/CONTRAST? Or ADJUST>AUTOMATIC
> CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT which gives me the options of BIAS, STRENGTH and
> APPEARANCE?

Apart from what others have said, try Curves for even more editing
power (but be careful with them). Also try Clarify, which works just
fine on B&W images. Remember that if you're happy with the automatic
output, there's nothing wrong with using it.

false_dmitrii

false_dmitrii@yahoo.com

2005-06-12, 11:21 pm

JoeB wrote:

> Do you mean the whole image looks lighter than the greyscale scan
> because of artifacts? Or that what looks like a color cast is
> caused by artifacts? I ask because, when desaturated and the
> color cast is removed, the image is still lighter than the
> greyscale scan and is also virtually true in lightness and
> everything else to the original, while the greyscale scan is
> darker.

The scanner driver might be using a different balance of the RGB
channels rather than performing a simple desaturation. It might even
be filtering the sensors themselves or altering the exposure slightly
to adjust to "typical" grayscale needs. It might also be tweaking the
color image in more ways before saving it (such as color space
conversion). Also, properly behaved scanner software (not by any means
all scanner software) works on high-bit-depth data, whereas PSP is
limited to 8-bits-per-channel. Might have an impact.

To test things properly, you'd have to turn off *all* scanner software
adjustments (color space conversion, histogram adjustments, any "auto"
adjustments, etc.). Make sure the grayscale and color are both set for
8-bit-per-channel output. Make sure there's no separate gamma setting
for grayscale (the embedded gamma value, not the histogram's "gamma"
slider). *Then* you could desaturate the color output in PSP and see
if there's still a difference.

It would also help to run Vuescan, which works directly with the
scanner hardware. VS can usually lock the scanner's exposure and
similar settings so that the hardware behaves the *same* between scans.
When properly configured, VS can dump the scanner's output directly to
a "raw" file, which would allow the ultimate one-on-one comparison
between the scanner's color and grayscale hardware output. That ought
to pin down whether the scanner's software has its own grayscale
conversion method. :)

Of course, if Kris was here he could tell us all about PSP's approach
to grayscale conversion and settle that end of the puzzle, right? :)

false_dmitrii