It's a question of TRUST...

You only have to search Google today to see just how many Photo Scanning Services there actually are out there, all offering photographic digital scanning services of one kind or another.

While our photographs may not have a definable financial value in the eyes of our household insurers they do however have tremendous (invaluable and irreplaceable) sentimental value. Digital scanning is an ideal way to protect your photographic memories for the future.

How can you decide which Service to trust with your precious photos or slides?

Scanning a slide or print is only part of the story the way in which they are packaged, transported, handled, processed and protected by the Scanning Service are just as important.  Most Services will require you to send them your photographs for processing by postal service which for many of you will require a high degree of confidence and trust in the Scanning Service that they will take very good care of your valuable memories.

When selecting a Company to entrust with your precious photos it may pay you to run through the following simple checklist in order to answer the most important question...

“CAN I TRUST THIS SERVICE?”

Operate from dedicated secure business premises?
24 Hour Monitored Security?
Environmentally controlled imaging Lab’s?
Comprehensive range of Professional scanning Equipment?
Provide secure data back-up as standard?
Secure Warehouse Storage?
Customer telephone support?
Door-to-Door tracked Courier Service?

Since starting our business 2 years ago we have made customers trust our number one priority. This is why we constantly review our methods, equipment, staff training and processes. We were the first UK Scanning Service to introduce door-to-door tracked courier collection and delivery. We were also the first to offer free photo storage in case the customer mislaid or damaged the CD we supply them. We were also the first to provide dedicated protective packaging as part of our delivery service.

Do our customers trust Us?...with over a million digital images already created I think so!

Finally, one important recommendation I would  like to make...

When selecting a Scanning Service it always pays to investigate exactly where that business actually operates from. One tip is to Google the address from their website and then use ‘Street View’ to see if it is a Residential or Commercial premises....I think you may be surprised at what you find..oh! and always avoid Service's that hide behind a P.O. Box number...you need to ask yourself “what are they hiding from?”

For those of you who are curious...here is a where we operate from...don't take my word for it, Google us!

Unit 15, Southfield Road, Kineton Road Ind Estate, Southam, Warwickshire, CV47 0FB.

www.photosreunited.com

It's a question of TRUST...

Scanners Versus Digital Cameras for Preserving Genealogical Documents and Photos

By James Tanner

About two years ago, I wrote a post entitled “Scanners Versus Digital Cameras for Preserving Genealogical Documents and Photos.” The time has come to update that post with the technological changes made in scanners and digital cameras since the date of that post. This post does not necessarily replace what I wrote previously, but highlights the changes in the last two years. Concerning scanners, for genealogists, the biggest change has been the introduction and promotion at genealogy conferences of an inexpensive portable scanner. In cameras, the resolution of inexpensive cameras has increased dramatically and higher-resolution built-in cameras are routinely included in smart phones.
One of the developments I have been watching for the past few years is whether or not digital cameras could produce images with the same resolution and quality as flatbed scanners. If you were to try to compare the two different methods of preserving documents and photos merely by reading the specifications for each type of device, you would soon become hopelessly confused. Scanner manufacturers claim resolutions in excess of 9600 dots per inch (dpi) while camera manufacturers focus on mega pixel (MP) counts, with commonly available cameras promoted at resolutions of 21.5 MP. Unfortunately, neither of these methods of measuring resolution tell us much about the real quality of the images produced by the different devices. Here are several rules to follow when making a decision between the claims of different devices.

Rule #1: The quality of an image produced by cameras depends on the lens more than the number of mega pixels.

Think for just a minute. The image produced by a camera always goes through the lens before it hits the sensor (where the film used to be). So even before you get concerned with the resolution of the sensor of a camera, you need to be concerned about the quality of the lens. Can you really expect the same quality from a tiny 1/4 inch lens in a smartphone as you can get from an expensive high-quality lens on a single-lens reflex (SLR) camera? This difference in the quality of the lenses does not mean that the smartphone camera will not take an “acceptable” image; it does mean, however, that the more expensive lens will produce a much higher quality image.
One challenge with comparing images produced by an inexpensive smartphone camera and one produced by good quality SLR camera and lens is that the differences are subtle and sometimes take years of experience and education in the area of photography to discover. In addition, we have a relatively long history of film photography and it is only recently that digital photography has achieved a measure of the quality and resolution of film cameras with high quality lenses.
Here are several articles, some of which date back a few years, discussing the difference between digital images and those produced on film:

• Wikipedia: Digital versus film photography
• Film vs. Digital Cameras
• Digital vs. Film Photography & Using Photoshop
• Digital Photography Advantages

If you read any of the above articles, or similar ones, and focus on the date of the article,  you will begin to see how digital technology has rather quickly overcome the quality of film cameras. There is no question that today’s inexpensive point and shoot digital cameras, by and large, have a much higher quality than the inexpensive film cameras of the past. You can still find a really bad digital camera, but most of the major manufacturers have produced acceptable quality cameras. The quality of the inexpensive digital cameras has dramatically improved.
But what about the lenses? The technology of digital vs. film has not directly affected the lenses. Overall lens quality has improved because manufacturing techniques and standards have risen, but newer high-end expensive lenses are not necessarily dramatically improved over some of the lenses of the past. As I noted, improvement has been most dramatic in the less expensive cameras and lenses. If you want to improve the quality of your images, you have to improve the quality of the lens as well as look at the resolution of the sensor.

Rule #2 The quality of an image depends as much on camera technique as well as the resolution of the camera and quality of the lens.

We have all seen really bad photographs. I have known some well-to-do camera enthusiasts who had the money to purchase the best and most expensive equipment, but never seemed to take a good picture even of simple subjects. The technical aspects of making images of documents and historical objects are just as important as the equipment. The best equipment in the world will not help you make good images if you don’t know how to use the equipment and utilize proper and appropriate settings and methods of photography. Digital devices are really computers in disguise. You need to know how to use the equipment whether it is a mobile scanner or a digital camera. If the image is blurry because you moved the camera while taking the picture there is no way to compensate for an out-of-focus image. Use a tripod or other stabilization device and make sure the image is in focus before taking a picture.

Rule #3 When buying a scanner be aware of physical limitations of the devices.

As I mentioned above, scanner manufacturers claim exorbitantly high resolutions for their devices. However, there is a physical limitation of the actual resolution, and that is the number of physical imaging elements, either flourescent, LED or LCD elements, sometimes mis-named the optical resolution. As time goes on, the resolution claims get higher and higher but the actual sensor count has not risen so dramatically. The higher resolutions are usually extrapolated by software and do not really increase the amount of detail available.
It is sometimes really difficult to determine the actual physical (or as is commonly described the “optical”) resolution of a particular scanner. For example, the technical specifications for a very popular mobile scanner do not tell the number of scanning sensors and this is not unique; for most scanners, you have to dig into the technical specifications to find the real optical resolution. The claims that a scanner will scan at a certain dpi is only useful if the number of physical sensors supports that resolution. Another example, the Canon 9000F Film Scanner, advertises 300 x 300 and 600 x 600 dpi resolution in the technical specifications, but in advertisements the resolution is claimed to be 9600 x 9600 maximum color resolution for film and 4800 x 4800 for documents. Canon also claims 19,200 x 19,200 (interpolated) for software enhanced scans.
The main difficulty in comparing digital devices is that the images you produce are usually displayed on a monitor or other screen at a resolution far less than 300 dpi so that it is even more difficult to tell what you are getting. For more information you may wish to read “My scanner has a resolution of 9600 x 1200 dpi –what do those numbers mean?” for a short introduction to the issues.
As you can see, comparing two different imaging devices is not as simple as it might seem by looking at the ads. Since my last post, digital cameras have increased in imaging quality at all levels while scanners have remained pretty much the same, although the claims would lead you to believe otherwise. There has been an increase in the quality of scanners through the use of LED and LCD light sources but the changes are mostly in power usage and speed rather than image quality. The answer is usually the same to any question about technology, you need to do your homework.

Original Post: https://www.familysearch.org/techtips/2012/02/2012-scanners-versus-digital-cameras-preserving-genealogical-documents-photos
 

Scanners Versus Digital Cameras for Preserving Genealogical Documents and Photos

The First World War From Above

The First World War From Above

Preserving & Protecting Photographs

1. Natural (and not-so-natural) Enemies of Photographs

The physical enemies of photographs include obvious villains (like direct sunlight, insects and rodents) and those that are more subtle: adhesives that degrade over time, sulfur compounds that can be given off by wood or rubber and trigger fading, and high humidity that can encourage mold growth.

Experts advise against storing photographs in basements, attics and garages. They recommend storage materials specifically designed for long-term stability (called "archival" products). Surprisingly, many of the products sold by frame shops and retailers contain materials like high-acid wood pulp and Polyvinyl Chloride that can trigger deterioration.

So the first set of recommendations is based on common sense: use archival materials and keep your photographs away from bright light, widely fluctuating humidity, and extreme temperatures.


2. Small-format Photographs: Cartes de Visite, Cabinet Cards, Stereo Views, Postcards

We've seen valuable 130-year old tintypes ruined by being placed in clear vinyl album pages (the type sold for baseball cards) and then left to cook in the sun at an outdoor antiques market. In other instances, stacks of tintypes and cartes de visite removed from the protection of their original albums are pored over by one collector after another--with the images rubbing against each other and accumulating bends and scratches.

Fortunately, there are alternatives. Several types of clear plastic sleeves are available in the right sizes for cartes de visite, cabinet cards, stereo views and photographic postcards. Archival materials used for this purpose include polypropylene and polyester film (Mylar is the best-known trade name.) Both of these plastics are considered stable for long-term use. The polyester sleeves offer improved clarity.

Sleeved photographs can be stored in archival file boxes. The least-expensive type is made from "safe" cardboard with metal reinforcements in the corners.

Sleeved cartes de visite and cabinet cards can often be inserted into antique albums, providing a degree of protection from stray fingerprints and dust. However, the albums may not be chemically inert and in our experience, are usually too fragile to survive much use.


3. Family Albums and Collections of Loose Images

Family albums and collections of loose images need to be organized as well as protected. Loose-leaf albums are great for organizing. However, many commercially-available albums, as well as the familiar old photo albums with black paper pages, are considered potentially hazardous because they may have been made of unsafe materials. "Magnetic" photo albums can leave adhesive residues on images, and vinyl album pages can give off harmful fumes.

When the albums or collections consist of a mixture of sizes and formats, the photographs can be arranged on archival paper pages and mounted with archival photo corners. Then the completed pages slide into clear polyester or polypropylene pockets, prepunched for three-ring binders. Most large office supply stores carry boxes of page protectors. Look for products made of polypropylene that are labeled "archival" or "archival safe."

Even recently-made photographs in standard sizes (3" x 5", 4 " x 6", 5" x 7") can be stored safely, by using multi-pocket album pages made of inert polypropylene instead of non-archival PVC plastics.

4. Unmounted Albumen Prints

Unmounted albumen prints (and those that have been removed from old, deteriorating mounts) provide a special problem: they have an alarming tendency to curl. Some collectors and institutions hinge them at four corners, but we believe we've stumbled onto a much better solution: carefully slip each print into a strong, crystal-clear polyester envelope. The envelope can then be attached to a piece of mat board with a hinged overmat, and framed if desired. This holds the image flat and provides support for the print; the envelope can not be seen once the print is framed.

Of course, polyester envelopes containing unmounted albumen prints can be kept unmatted in an archival box, avoiding the weight of the mat board.

Fragile photographic prints on materials other than albumen paper can benefit from the same treatment.


5. Larger Photographic Prints

Have a stack of larger photographs? You'll get the most protection for the money by putting each one in a separate polyethylene bag. This is a quick solution for images that are not going to be individually matted.

For the best presentation, each photograph (including its original mounting board, if present) should be attached to a 100% rag acid-free mat board, with a window-mat of the same material hinged to fold over it. Use acid-free linen tape to hinge the two mats together, and archival mounting corners to hold the photograph in place. The window-mat hides any imperfections on the original mount. It also keeps the photograph from coming in contact with the glass of a frame.

Some experts recommend NON-BUFFERED 100% rag materials for albumen prints, salt prints, cyanotypes and color photographs. For other types of photographic prints, buffers in the mat board provide protection from acids in the environment.

Appropriate mat boards are not available at all custom framers, but many will be willing to cut and fit archival materials provided by their customers.

Because wood can give off harmful chemicals, most experts advise using metal frames.

When displaying photographs, please be aware that exposure to sunlight or unfiltered fluorescent lights can cause or accelerate fading. Ultraviolet-filtering acrylic sheets can be used in place of glass in frames, reducing the risk somewhat. Under no circumstances should photographs be placed in direct window light. This is especially important for very early images and for color prints.

For storing matted and unmatted prints, choose archival boxes -- either those with metal corner reinforcements, or the pricier (but better-looking) archival portfolio boxes.

We've also found polypropylene boxes at office supply stores and retailers like Target. They have tight-fitting lids and come in a variety of useful sizes. The manufacturers don't claim they're archival, but chances are they'll be better for storing photographs than old shoe boxes or packing boxes made from corrugated cardboard.

How do you tell if a plastic box is made from polypropylene? Look for the recycling symbol on the bottom, with the number 5 and the letters "PP".


6. Special Cases: Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes & Tintypes

Daguerreotypes, ambrotypes and early tintypes were usually sold in small folding cases. The cases were designed to keep the fragile surfaces of these images safe behind glass. Over the years, the cover glass in a cases can crack or become dirty. Some researchers report the glass itself can deteriorate, causing damage to the surface of daguerreotypes.

Many collectors and conservators choose to replace the old cover glass. This is an operation that requires EXTREME CAUTION. The fragile surface of a daguerreotype has been compared to the delicate wings of a butterfly--one inadvertent touch and it will be marred forever. Removing the image from its case also requires care, because a slip can permanently bend a daguerreotype or tintype...or crack an ambrotype. One other potential drawback to replacing the glass: some collectors put a premium on daguerreotypes that have their original paper seals intact. If the seal is present, breaking it to replace the glass may have an impact on the image's market value.

When in doubt, consult an expert...

Originally published by The American Photography Museum

Preserving & Protecting Photographs

Oh Christmas Tree!: A History in Photos

The most recognizable and traditional symbol of the holiday season, the Christmas tree is a custom that has continued from generation to generation and place to place.

But how did the the fir tree find its way from the lonely forests into homes?

 People first started selling Christmas trees in German marketplaces. People would bring the trees home and set them up undecorated.

So many evergreen trees had been cut down that a 1561 forest ordinance from Ammerschweier in Alsace, France (then part of Germany) declared that each burgher was allowed only one Christmas tree and that the tree could be no more than "8 shoes" in height (slightly over 4 feet).

 With the advent of wrapping paper in the 1880s, gifts, previously hung from the tree, were placed under the tree. The first electrically illuminated Christmas tree dates to 1882, just three years after the invention of the incandescent light bulb by Thomas Edison.

The event was reported in the Detroit Post and Tribune by a reporter named Croffut: "Last evening I walked over beyond Fifth Avenue and called at the residence of Edward H. Johnson, vice-president of Edison's electric company."

According to the report, Johnson's Christmas tree was "brilliantly lighted with many colored globes" the size of walnuts. Overall, there were  80 red, white and blue electric light bulbs.

Christmas tree decorations were further revolutionized in 1890, when the first blown glass ornaments were introduced into the United States, again from Germany.

The  Christmas tree was introduced in England by Prince Albert, who in 1839 bought a tree from his native Germany as a courtship gift to Princess Victoria. Soon Christmas trees became popular in the entire country.

In 1896, a 100-foot-high tree was erected at the Royal Aquarium in London. A couple thousand electric lamps illuminated its branches. "Tied on to the 'tree," which was built of several trees, were 20,000 toys, which were distributed among the poor children of London," wrote the daily Bristol Mercury.

Probably the most famous Christmas tree was the 70-foot-high tree given in 1947 by the city of Oslo as a gift to the people of London.

This year marks the 65th tree to come to London as a token of Norwegian appreciation of British friendship during WWII, when the Norwegian monarch and government moved to London after the German invasion of the country.

In the 1900s, over-harvesting of evergreens began to alarm conservationists and 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt tried to ban Christmas trees from holiday celebrations.

Around the same time, the first Christmas tree farm was started in New Jersey and the first artificial trees appeared in the United States, manufactured by the Addis British company, makers of toilet bowl brushes. In 1950, the aluminum tree was patented.

The evergreen fir tree is now defying a sagging economy with soaring sales. According to analysts, Christmas tree sending for 2011 in the United States is likely to be the highest since before the recession in 2008.

Americans are expected to spend about $800 million for 25 million real trees and another $2.6 billion on 10 million artificial versions.

According to the Vatican daily L'Osservatore Romano, Italy was one of the last countries to accept the Christmas tree since they were long seen by the church as a Protestant practice.

"Pope Paul VI (1897-1978), of venerable memory, began the tradition of setting up a massive Christmas tree beside the grand crib in St Peter's Square," wrote the Vatican daily.

This year's tree, decorated with 2,500 silver and gold ornaments, comes from  Ukraine.

"It's a significant symbol of Christ's nativity because, with its evergreen boughs, it reminds us of enduring life," said Pope Benedict XVI.


Merry Christmas!


Full artical: http://news.discovery.com/history/christmas-tree-history-111221.html

Oh Christmas Tree!: A History in Photos

Review Photo Scanning Services

Spending a few minutes looking at reviews of photo scanning services for pictures and slides will show you that scanning procedures vary, as do the types of colour correcting and amount of time involved. And so it makes sense to look at the techniques of a handful of providers prior to spending money scanning your old photos.

Why You Should Let a Photo Scanning Service Do the Grunt Work?
For starters, let’s agree you have better things to do than scan 1000+ pictures by hand. The appeal of shipping your stuff off to a scanning service is that it frees you from having to do all the monotonous work yourself. Just box up all your images and mail them to the scanning company. Just about all providers will take pictures in albums and slide sleeves or trays (although it may cost a bit more) and it will be returned in the exact order.

But before you box everything up you should review scanning services and compare them to see what is included in the price in terms of scanning cost, image cleaning, what kind of colour correction and touch ups they do and what formats of slides and negatives they will scan.

Dust and Scratch Removal and Colour Enhancement
A fast review of photo scanning services shows that a majority of providers offer dust and smudge removal. Yet there are variations in levels of image enhancements.A lot of providers will scan, crop, rotate and make colour corrections with bulk auto corrections. The top providers do the scanning manually and make colour enhancements manually with Photoshop, delivering far better images.

How Much Time is Involved
Some companies take longer than others. A number of highly rated services have lengthy turn-around of four weeks or so since they do all scanning outside the country with secure packaging and tracking. Other companies are UK based and may still take several weeks turnaround time, also with door-to-door tracking. During my evaluation of scanning times and shipping methods, I determined that the top services came through without every losing a customer’s order. But the bottom line is, in order to get quality digitised images you are not going to be able to get large quantities of photos scanned, enhanced and delivered in just a couple of days.

What Do You Get Back From the Scanning Service?
Once again, a review of photo scanning services reveals that many will just send you a DVD of your new digital photos, whilst other companies offer online image review so you can organise them before they are put on DVD Apart from a DVD with your photos, several companies will give you your own web page for photo sharing and archiving your images. It’s handy insurance against accidental loss.
Scanning your photos, 35mm slides and negatives, done properly will preserve your family photos forever and give them new life so you can share and enjoy them with today’s generation. Still, be sure you review several scanning companies prior to shipping off your family photos.

PHOTOS REUNITED is the only UK Image Scanning Service that offers door-to-door tracked collection service and guarantees that all photos are handled and scanned in the UK!


Article source: http://goarticles.com/article/You-ll-Avoid-Surprises-If-You-Review-Photo-Scanning-Service-Features-Beforehand/5817654/

Review Photo Scanning Services

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas!