Scanning fiber paper prints

[tbm]

Have any of you scanned your fiber paper prints with a standard flatbed scanner and noticed the texture of the paper creating slight degradation of the final scan? Do let me know of your findings. Thanks!

Terry

 

[Joe Lipka]

A common problem with scanning alt process prints where there is some texture to the paper surface. I have tried scanning and different resolutions, even tried copying with a (gasp) digital camera and have yet to find something that will work with textured paper.

Matte/Pearl finish seems to work for my scans when I was doing silver prints.

I think that Flying Camera came up with some parameters for this type of scanning, but I can't remember them off the top of my head.

 

[David Henderson]

I've done this on my Epson 3200 and haven't noticed any texture in the paper. Mind you, this might be a case of the scanner's resolution isn't able to pick up texture in the paper- though the printed image itself looks fine too, good enough to pass muster at my photo library anyway. For information I've been scanning Forte Polywarmtone semi- matt and gloss and I scanned at 1200 dpi.

 

[catem]

I have found that textures are amplified by scanning, as is grain (regardless of sharpening factors).

The worst culprit in this that I've found is Kentmere Art Classic, beautiful in the print but horrible (peculiar!) as a print scan.

That's one reason why I sometimes choose to scan from the neg - not to open a can of worms as I also think prints scans are, indeed, often a good way to go...(and sometimes the only way )

I always think it's a shame about Art Classic because the paper is an important part of the final result, and it seems impossible to replicate digitally...if anyone has any answers/suggestions I'd be interested....

 

[patrickjames]

There are ways around this in photoshop, dare I say that word here on APUG? I have had problems with shadow degradation and figured out a workaround. If anyone is interested let me know and I can maybe email you an action that takes care of it.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I have noticed that when I scan particularly Agfa MCC paper, the texture of the paper comes through very degradingly. My theory is that the texture causes some parts of the print to be out of focus, since the texture would cause some parts of the emulsion to actually not be directly on the scanner glass. Think of it as really poor depth of field. You know what the scan looks like when you scan something that's not flat. Distorted.
Another thing to consider is that the scanner reads reflected light. If you have a surface that is not even, the reflected light will reflect in a way that makes it difficult for the scanner to pick it up.

That's the only logical explanation I could come up with. I have tried to add extra weight on top of the print, but to no avail.

- Thom

 

[keithwms]

I haven't yet tried scanning matte fiber but if I did I think I might consider scanning it wet, if at all possible. Some papers would expand too much for that to work but some might be okay. Worst case, the paper expands too much or too irregularly. Then I suppose you could varnish it if you don't mind doing so!

(always happy to provide nutty suggestions)

 

[SeamusARyan]

My scans of kodak ektalure prints are hideous, the texture of the paper shows up as lighter/darker patches depending on how the light hits it, so I too am doing neg scans and using those on my website

sorry to be of no help

enjoy

Seamus
www.seamusryan.com

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I've had no problems at all with scanning silver-based bartya coated gloss fiber paper. I do run into problems with hand-coated palladium prints where the image sits in the paper, not on it, and the scanner picks up the paper texture, but I don't find it painfully objectionable.

 

[winger]

I scan with an Epson 4870 and haven't seen major problems with most prints. Anything in my gallery that was scanned from a print (and it'll say in the info somewhere) was done that way. I scan them at actual size then resize them to 650 or so pixels high so they'll fit on the web. That might minimize some scanning artefacts.

 

[donbga]

There are ways around this in photoshop, dare I say that word here on APUG? I have had problems with shadow degradation and figured out a workaround. If anyone is interested let me know and I can maybe email you an action that takes care of it.

Patrick,

I'm interested in the action. Could you e-mail it to me?

Thanks,

 

[Dave Miller]

I use an old Canon 2400 flatbed scanner and don't seem to have the problem. A couple of prints in my gallery were on textured paper, Kentmere Art Document, and I was disappointed that the texture of the paper isn't showing.

 

[DKT]

this is how you do it...just like with film, when you have to copy something with a surface texture, cross polarize it--use a copystand type setup with a camera, put polarizing screens in front of the lights, orient these in the same direction. set up your camera (film or digital) with a polarizing filter and turn that until the texture is knocked out.

works like a charm with old tweed type ektalure prints, old c-prints and all sorts of other stuff, especially silvered out old photos. you have to remember that in the old-days, the texture was often used as a device to thwart copying, back then, as now, the only way around it was to use polarizers on the lights & the lens.

hope this helps.

 

[telkwa]

i've scanned many 11x14" FB prints on a crappy flatbed scanner (like 100 bucks). i see no texture of any kind and the scan quality captures all the detail in the centre of the picture i can see under a microscope (TMX).