The Scanning Project

1) Introduction

The aim of this continuing series is to describe my experiences and hopefully encourage you to start your own scanning project. I will cover topics such as editing for scanning, working with various film types and formats, using flatbed and “dedicated” film scanners, and different software programs. I welcome your comments and suggestions.

This project is not aimed at archivists at large institutions who have access to very high end scanning systems, but is more suited to those with medium-size image collections who want to digitize their film work within a budget and with equipment that does not require an advanced degree to operate. It is also aimed at those who remain dedicated to film capture but want to output on inkjet printers or for web albums. The procedures discussed are also useful for small museums, historical societies and collectors who have  negatives, prints and even glass plates and want to preserve and perhaps enhance those images.

Like many folks who made photos during the film days, I disassembled my darkroom years back. I contributed the equipment to schools that still teach the chemical craft. 

Yet, I still had boxes and sleeves with transparencies and black and white negatives and slides of various formats that might not ever see the light of a print again—were it not for the ability to scan and digitize the images for web publishing and inkjet printing.

This scan from a 5x7 glass plate negative purchased at a flea market was made on a flatbed scanner using the “negative” scan mode, which converted it to a positive image, which was then processed to enhance contrast and clean up flaws in the emulsion. Photographer: Unknown.

Somehow I felt I owed it to the work done and time spent and visions captured to at least make the effort to transfer them to a medium that allowed me to both re-explore the work and manifest it in some fashion. While my main medium during those film days was black and white negatives, I also had lots of slides in both 35mm and medium format, and a scattering of color negatives and some chromogenic film (film that could be processed in color chemistry yet that lacked color dye layers so it was essentially a black-and-white medium.)

As I considered this task it became clear to me that this was not something I could do in a week or even a year. I have been photographing for almost 40 years and amassed a large collection of images. I had thankfully done culling throughout those years, yet I was still confronted by thousands of images in different formats and film types. The ones I kept were for sentimental reasons, because I thought they were good images that defined my vision and photographic quests, and simply because I just couldn’t make up my mind whether to keep or chuck them on my edit go-rounds.

That’s when the importance of editing became apparent to me, and while this is personal to each and every photographer it is an essential part of the process. (I can only imagine what future photographers will face when confronted in the future with the horde of digital images they have made.) I was never shy about using film and shooting a brick of film (20 rolls) on various stock and assignment jaunts, but digital encourages overshooting, what with the erase-ability of memory cards and high framing rates and super-automation that makes it all a pushbutton affair.

Luckily, in my past position as editor of various photo magazines, I had access to and tested numerous types of scanners and software along the way. During that period I would spend an intense week or more with each type of scanner and software and learn their capabilities and foibles to write my reviews and articles. But I never quite had the time to take on the “big project” of addressing all my past images, although the lessons learned during that time served as a good basis for the task at hand.

Next posting: An Outline of the Project

Mary Ellen Mark Interview

Excerpts from an interview with Mary Ellen Mark by Grace Schaub first published in July, 1990. The full interview was re-published in December, 2015 in the Focal Press book, Twentieth Century Photographers (ISBN 9781138840959). 

Grace Schaub: What are some of the themes in your work that keep coming up?

Mary Ellen Mark: I think with most artists and writers their life's work consists of themes that are repeated again and again.  It took me a long time to realize that, but now I understand it and relish the idea of working through my obsessions.  I see that I'm often returning to themes from the earlier subjects I've photographed.  I go back to them and  photograph them in different ways but the themes are often the same.  One of them is teenagers.  I think that's an incredible age.  Another is mental health, that's something I've always been interested in.  A third theme of mine is irony--strange juxtapositions--humor and sadness and the ironic nature of life and people.  And I guess I'm always interested in, and always will be, in people who I feel are on the fringes of society.

GS: Which of your themes are autobiographical?

MEM: I think everything is, in a sense. I can't say, I'm not an analyst and I've never been analyzed, but probably part of that is I'm someone who has always felt on the fringe.  Therefore, I'm very comfortable with people on the edges of society. I'm less at ease with people who are very rich and famous--I always feel insecure. I like to feel I can be a voice for people who don't have a voice. That interests me. And, I'd like to take pictures of those people that I feel need a voice. That aspect of photography certainly interests me much more than glamour photography. There is a side of being a portrait photographer or a documentary photographer that can offer you a very glamourous life.

GS: You could have made that choice.

MEM: Yes, for a long time I was working on many films, and that's a more commercial way of working.  But I really feel that at the end of my life--and I hope I work until the very end--I want to be able to look back and say what I've done is worthwhile.

GS: What attracts you to the people you photograph?

MEM: I care about the people I photograph.  I'd much rather photograph someone I cared about than someone I didn't.  But there were a few times when I photographed people I don't like, and that can also be interesting once in awhile. But I definitely prefer to photograph people I like. 

GS: Especially since you go into such great depths with your stories, and spend so much time with the people you photograph.

MEM: Day after day as their lives unfold it becomes an adventure, sometimes a soap opera. You're there taking pictures, and are part of it in a way. Going back day after day with the street kids in Seattle and finding out who Tiny's with today, who Patti's going to fight, and what the big drama on the street was going to be was an amazing experience for me. You really get caught up in it, and get to know the kids very well.

GS: How do you approach a story in terms of research, contacts, and networking?

MEM: I believe in a lot of research.  For example, I did a story on ethnic communities in Austrailia for National Geographic, and I didn't really have the time to spend researching.  It would have taken months, so I found a researcher in Sidney.  I looked for certain subjects that I was interested in that dealt with ethnic groups and had the researcher research them for me to find out exactly what was happening, and where and when certain events were taking place. When I arrived I had a schedule and something to start with, otherwise I'd have to start from scratch. I like to go to a place, particularly a foreign country, and feel at least I have a handle on the situation.

GS: Is it difficult breaking into documentary photography?

MEM: I think it's tough breaking into the field in general.  But if you do work that's really good it will get published because there's always a place to publish great work.  Once you have the completed project you should bring it around and show it to people.  You can't rely on someone else to get you work, you have to motivate yourself.  I've never sat around waiting for someone else to get me work.  There's always some project I want to do and I'll go ahead and do it on my own.

To visit the Focal Press web site with more information on the book, Twentieth Century Photographers by Grace Schaub:

Click here

Raw or JPEG? File Format Settings for Best Image Quality

You have a number of file format options when making photographs with your digital camera. Each of us has an end use in mind when we photograph: web galleries and blogs, prints, or shares. The following recommendations are for the best image quality overall. Keep in mind that resizing or resampling is an easy matter these days, so why not get the best captured file and then alter it to your specific end use later? In any case, here are my recommendations to get the best image quality your camera can deliver.

Here's the back of a Pentax camera showing the menu for choosing "Image Capture Settings." This is where you choose the file format and compression. When this item is highlighted push the OK button (or in some camera toggle the 4-way controller to the right) and all the options are shown. In this illustrations JPEG "Large" is chosen with the lowest compression ratio.

If you shoot in JPEG format:

1. Choose the largest file size you can get. If you have a choice of various pixel resolutions choose the largest. Cameras give you the ability to choose among a number of JPEG file size images To get the best results choose the largest size as this insures that you'll capture all the information the sensor is able to record. 2
2. Choose the lowest compression ratio. Compression is a way for the system to gather more images on a given capacity memory card, but it tosses away information when it writes to the card and replaces that information with mathematical formulas, not "raw" image data.
3. Don't "tweak" the image processor in the camera with contrast or sharpness settings. These are fine for special effects in the camera, but you can do better with the image information later in the digital darkroom.
4. Don't use digital zoom. This actually crops into the sensor rather than getting optical information through the lens. Even if you use the largest available resolution (Large) and lowest compression you'll lose information.

Here's the back of a Sony alpha camera. Here the size of the image (highlighted in red) and the Image Quality selector are separated. The size here is a large JPEG. Selecting the Quality item will then allow you to choose Raw only, or Raw+JPEG.

If you have a camera that allows you to choose between JPEG and Raw format, do the following:

1. Choose Raw. Raw files allow for the most processing freedom and deliver the best quality image. It’s higher in bit depth (more information) and is not compressed, thus is called “lossless.” The only drawback to Raw is that you have to open and view and change the image file in special software, usually bundled with the camera that has a Raw mode option or a third-party raw processing software, such as Adobe Camera Raw.
2. If you have a choice of pixel resolutions in Raw, choose the highest pixel count. In most cases Raw automatically chooses the highest resolution your camera can deliver, but some cameras now offer a “small Raw” (s-Raw). This is offered to help speed workflow for those who do not need very large files but still want higher bit depth and no compression. For most of us this does not apply, especially when making our own prints.

In ye old days memory cards were expensive and images per card were often limited, both by capacity and budget. These days that’s almost a non-issue, so my best advice is: Shoot RAW+JPEG. That way you have a small and portable JPEG and a file you can use for prints. The camera records both simultaneously and the image will show up in both formats in your browser.  

Although the image resolution or file size is key, that's just part of the equation. Of course, exposure and lens sharpness and how the camera's internal image processor converts the data from the sensor to digitized image information all have a very important role to play as well.

Capture the "Water Flow" Effect

One of the more pleasing uses of shutter speed in landscape photography is recording the flowing motion of water in rivers, steams and even ocean waves. The combination of motion and stillness within the frame is quite intriguing: it "idealizes" the water flow as it opens up the imagination to the complex physics of the world.

There is no set shutter speed that will accomplish this effect for every shot, as the rate of flow will differ in each scene. A good starting point might be 1/15 second. The angle at which you photograph the motion will have a profound effect on the result. Shooting at a right angle (perpendicular to the subject) will enhance the motion; shooting at less than a right angle will require a slower shutter speed to get a similar effect.

copyright George Schaub

To get this flowing water effect I set the camera on a tripod and set the exposure mode at shutter priority at 1/8 second, a guesstimate exposure. I bracketed one stop either way for insurance and got three exposures: the set exposure (1/8 second), 1/4 second and 1/15 second. My guess was right: final exposure: f/22 at 1/8 second. Note that I focused on the foreground rock to insure sharpness throughout the frame (28mm lens).

 The main issue you might run into when going for this effect is too bright a light level. In other words, even if you stop the aperture down to its minimum, working at the desired slow shutter speed may cause overexposure. 

To get around this:

1)    Set the ISO to the lowest number.

2)   Because of the brightness level you might “run out” of aperture to control exposure. In bright light, even at f/16 or f/22, you might only get a reading of, say 1/60 second, which is too fast to attain this effect.

3)   If that occurs you can:

a)   Find a spot where the light level is lower (shoot in the shade) or

b)   Place a light reducing filter over the lens, such as an ND filter (which can help lower light levels by two stops or more, depending on the ND filter strength) or polarizing filter (about 1.5 stops less light.) 

4)   Mount the camera on a tripod or other steadying device. (Of course, if shooting near the edge of the water or even in it make sure the device is rock solid before letting go. I speak from experience.)

5)   Use a cable release or remote shutter release accessory. Lacking same use the short self-timer shutter release mechanism. This helps steady pictures.

6)   Start at 1/15 second and go progressively slower in shutter speed. Use bracketing: set the camera in TV (or S on some cameras: shutter priority mode) and it will bracket with shutter speed settings.

7)   If you are close to the effect you want but are slightly overexposed, shooting in RAW format will give you a 1 to 1.5 stop allowance that you can correct later in processing. Any more overexposure beyond that will usually not be recoverable.