LaserSoft Imaging

Hi everyone,


I am fairly new at scanning and printing of digital images, so I may be asking some dumb questions ( I am a blonde after all ), so please bear with me.

I paint, using acrylic and oil, mostly on a 4mm thick panel. My paintings usually have matte finish.
I will need to scan with enough resolution to be able to print at double the size of my originals ( which are mostly 16x20 or 18x24 inches ). I guess the resolution of 600 dpi would probably be enough for this purpose.

Buying a wide format scanner will not be a financial option for some time. There are lots of paintings to scan, so the price for having them professionally scanned would be way too high, although I’ve had a few of my important images scanned by professionals.

So I’m planning to buy a regular photo scanner and use Photoshop’s photomerge function to stitch up the partial scans of my paintings. The initial tests with some images seem to show that the photomerge is done relatively fast. It will still be a lot of work, but I’m ready to ‘roll up my sleeves’ and get it done…

My research locally, in Vancouver Canada, has narrowed the choice of scanners to
Epson’s Perfection V500, which has a nice flat surface on top of which I could move my paintings easily for the multiple partial scans. The top cover on this scanner can be easily removed, exposing the whole surface (‘platen’?), which I found to be a problem with many other easily available scanners.

Does anyone have any other suggestion as far as scanners are concerned, or advice in general how to best approach this problem ?
I would rather use a scanner than go the digital photo route, which I have tried and found too cumbersome and not producing files good enough to allow any enlargement.

Do I really need a program like SilverFast, which I understand is mostly used for high resolution scanning of film and transparencies, but maybe a bit of an overkill for my purposes?

What features of this software may be the most useful (if any ), for me ?

What I like about this program, from what I’ve read, are the functions such as multiple exposure and multiple scans, to be able to calibrate the scanner, and maybe most promising, to create profiles for different print media at the point of scanning.

Am I totally off the mark here?

Also, will I be able to control the amount of shadow caused by paintings’ texture with this program and with this (or another) scanner?

I’ve found entries on this forum regarding Epson V500 which seem to talk about a problem with the focusing on this scanner and SilverFast.
Was that problem fixed with a newer version of the program?

I know, I know, too many questions…

Thanks in advance,

Michelle

Hi Michelle,

Michelle 33 wrote:I may be asking some dumb questions ( I am a blonde after all ), so please bear with me.

I will try to address all your questions (I do not think they're dumb).

Michelle 33 wrote:I guess the resolution of 600 dpi would probably be enough for this purpose.

Your assumption here is perfectly right. Most modern printers use a photographic printing resolution of 300 dpi, so if you double that you will enlarge your scannings twice their original size.

Michelle 33 wrote:Epson’s Perfection V500, which has a nice flat surface on top of which I could move my paintings easily for the multiple partial scans. The top cover on this scanner can be easily removed, exposing the whole surface (‘platen’?), which I found to be a problem with many other easily available scanners.

Well it seems a very good argument, however up to this point you might have forgotten something important in your workflow. Most flatbed scanners (including the Epson Perfection V500) have a safety area which is used to calibrate the scanner before every scan, that safety area should always be uncovered so the lamp and chip calibration can take place correctly.

I do not know how are you planning to leave that area empty if you are planning to scan a hard pannel,unless you cut the painting pannel in many small parts that fit exactly the scanner surface size but I do not believe that is a posibility for you (again, not the entire area of the glass should be covered), that is the most serious problem here.
Perhaps you should stick to the outsourcing or purchasing a bigger scanner, perhaps an A3 size, like the Epson Expression 10000 XL, plus most of those scanners come with a bundled version of SilverFast, important with scanners with bundles is that you make sure the bundled version of SilverFast is at least 6.5, older versions that that will probably not work with the latest operating systems and might require to purchase upgrades.

Michelle 33 wrote:Do I really need a program like SilverFast, which I understand is mostly used for high resolution scanning of film and transparencies, but maybe a bit of an overkill for my purposes?What features of this software may be the most useful (if any ), for me ?

SilverFast is a professional scanning software, yes, it is mostly used for high res scanning of film and transparencies but it is also used for scanning reflective material and color management in entire workflows, this is also certain for every different type of scanner, there are film dedicated scanners for which does not make any sense to try scanning reflective material, there are others like the one I mentioned above which might be used to scan films and slides, but its primary purpose is to digitize reflective material like your paintings, there are features like De-screening, and the ones you mention below might be useful as well.

Michelle 33 wrote:What I like about this program, from what I’ve read, are the functions such as multiple exposure and multiple scans, to be able to calibrate the scanner, and maybe most promising, to create profiles for different print media at the point of scanning.Am I totally off the mark here?

No, you are not off the mark, you are absolutely right on your suspicions and questions.

Michelle 33 wrote:Also, will I be able to control the amount of shadow caused by paintings’ texture with this program and with this (or another) scanner?

You will always have frontal illumination which mostly means no texture shadows, however it does not mean that the strucks in your paintings will be completely flat and gone. It is important to consider also how thick your paintings are because it has something to do with our next topic.

Michelle 33 wrote:I’ve found entries on this forum regarding Epson V500 which seem to talk about a problem with the focusing on this scanner and SilverFast.Was that problem fixed with a newer version of the program?

That was not a problem in SilverFast, the scanner itself has a very shallow depth of field which is perhaps 2 or 3 mm deep and it has only two fixed focusing levels, if the scanning material is located outside this range then you will not be able to focus the pictures completely. Hence the question about the texture of your paitings, especially the oil painting, if they are very thick and textured, they might fall out of focus.

I believe in your case you should see things in perspective and reconsider your posibilities, advantages and drawbacks so you can take the best decision.

Hello Michelle,

As a less expensive option you might try using a Digital Camera with appropriate lens and lighting to capture your paintings. This will allow you to capture the entire picture at one time in Camera RAW which you may then save as TIFF and process in SilverFast Studio in the same fashion you would using a scanner. I was forced to use this method because I was commissioned to restore and old poster sized picture and I could not risk damaging the original.

If you decide to use a scanner please note the entire bed of an Epson scanner is usable when scanning a reflective image. In my experience the registration is only an issue when scanning transparencies.

I hope this helps!

Hi Alejandro and RAG,

Thank you for your imput.

It sounds like the Epson Expression 10000XL would be much better suited for my purposes.
I did read about it, and it seems to offer much better focusing control and the depth of field.
But it is a substantiallly more expensive scanner, and I have this inexplicable aversion towards spending more money than absolutely needed...

Any other ideas about some other (cheaper) scanners, with a better depth of field ?

Re: RAG's suggestion to do it with a digital camera.
I would still go the route of a flatbed scanner, because of much better control and for just being able to have a dedicated set up in the studio for this, rather than setting up and taking down the photo gear every time I need a new image digitized.

Alejandro said:
>>Most flatbed scanners (including the Epson Perfection V500) have a safety area which is used to calibrate the scanner before every scan, that safety area should always be uncovered so the lamp and chip calibration can take place correctly. <<

I don't know how this calibration is done, but is it something similar to camera's white balance measurement?

Would it not be possible, then, to sort of 'trick the scanner', by giving it a piece of whitest white in the area which is intended for calibration, by taping a piece of white paper there, or something like that, and scan the portions of my image without having to 'cut it to pieces', as you put it...?

RAG said:
>>If you decide to use a scanner please note the entire bed of an Epson scanner is usable when scanning a reflective image. In my experience the registration is only an issue when scanning transparencies.<<

Are you addressing the same issue as Alejandro above, meaning calibration..?

"Studio out of the box" shooting table from Kaiser -
it is worth for capturing such paintings with digital camera.

It is handy when you take a picture of paintings right above accurately.

See demo at:
http://www.studio-out-of-the-box.com/MainE.html

Dear Michelle,

RAG wrote:If you decide to use a scanner please note the entire bed of an Epson scanner is usable when scanning a reflective image. In my experience the registration is only an issue when scanning transparencies.

Yes, Rag is addressing the very same topic. I must say I do not completely agree with his statement. The solution proposed by Rag might work but it also might not (as it's been the case here on our test center with some scanners). It is a recommendation from the manufacturer to leave the calibration area empty because it can create artifacts or incorrect color calibration (not only in transparency but also in reflective mode), plus in reflective mode most Epson scanners do not register any image outside the safety area, the scanning area is in reality only as big as the surface indicated by the markings next to the glass surface, the rest as already explained is used for calibration purposes.

Michelle 33 wrote:I don't know how this calibration is done, but is it something similar to camera's white balance measurement?

Yes it is like the white balance in a camera.

I do not believe it can be done in the proposed way because the lamp of the scanner is extremely powerful and would reflect some of colors of the paintings behing the paper, exactly that is the reason why they have this safety areas.

I had almost forgotten the option mentioned by Bakarena:

bakarena wrote:"Studio out of the box" shooting table from Kaiser - it is worth for capturing such paintings with digital camera.

This is a special camera-scanner which also comes with SilverFast, but you would need to get the entire set with the lamps so you get a more or less uniform illumination from the left and right side of your paintings, most likely you will still be faced with the issue of texture of the paintings.

I strongly believe that, before taking any purchase decision you should perhaps rent both equipmets for a couple of days, perform some tests and see which outcome you like most, you do not have to buy SilverFast until you decide which device you are going to get, you can always download and test the demo version first.

Cheers

LSI_Morales wrote:Dear Michelle,

RAG wrote:If you decide to use a scanner please note the entire bed of an Epson scanner is usable when scanning a reflective image. In my experience the registration is only an issue when scanning transparencies.

Yes, Rag is addressing the very same topic. I must say I do not completely agree with his statement. The solution proposed by Rag might work but it also might not (as it's been the case here on our test center with some scanners). It is a recommendation from the manufacturer to leave the calibration area empty because it can create artifacts or incorrect color calibration (not only in transparency but also in reflective mode), plus in reflective mode most Epson scanners do not register any image outside the safety area, the scanning area is in reality only as big as the surface indicated by the markings next to the glass surface, the rest as already explained is used for calibration purposes.

Aside from my personal experience with using the entire bed of the scanner with reflective images I offer you the picture below taken directly from an Epson user guide showing how a reflective image (or document) is to be placed on the glass for scanning. The registration area being discussed is indicated by the two small darker rectangular areas to the left of the call out balloon showing the upper right corner with the triangular indicator. (On the V500 there is a 3mm area on both the horizontal and vertical edges that can't be scanned.)