Scanning for a Blurb book

tomalophicon

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
1,568
Location
Canberra, AC
Format
Sub 35mm
I'm starting to think about the best way to get my prints to Blurb for a book.

Does anyone have experience with what kind of paper is good to use?

I want to use fibre, but does it make a difference whether it's glossy or matte?
Or is RC better?

I'm using a V500. Will this be suitable.

And I can only scan up to 8x10 inch. Should Is scan the biggest sheet I can, or scan 5x7 inch to save enlarging. I'm thinking of a smallish book.

Thanks, I will be experimenting on my own, but have usually just used the scanner to share pics online.
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
I think it depends on your scanner, choice of paper, and how flat you can get the prints. I've generally been unhappy with print scans, because of artifacts that can show up from the print surface, but others seem not to have this problem, and I suspect that has to do with choice of paper and the way that it interacts with the glass and the light source on their particular scanner. I find it easier to use a DSLR on a copy stand with lights and standard photographic copy techniques for copying flat artwork.
 

jeffreyg

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,638
Location
florida
Format
Medium Format
I haven't used Blurb but did make a couple of books myself. I think scanning the negative is the way to go if possible. If you have a decent negative and scanner system you don't need to be a wiz with PhotoShop. Editing and layout requires a lot of thought. I scanned, printed on double sided Moab cotton fiber paper (13x19), sewed and bound with the help of some internet instruction and even made the cover with archival board and book cover fabric and a tipped in print using some very simple tools. I did need a print shop to cut the edges of the pages before placing in the cover. It was a challenge but they came out great. One of these days I might even do more.

HOME PAGE
 

Bob Carnie

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Messages
7,735
Location
toronto
Format
Med. Format RF
The best results would be to scan the original negatives, and mimic the look of a print and send an original file.
Yes/No ??
Why would you want to make and then scan the print?
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
I agree with David A. Goldfarb on this issue.
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
David A. Goldfarb said:
I find it easier to use a DSLR on a copy stand with lights and standard photographic copy techniques for copying flat artwork.
Click to expand...

I agree with David A. Goldfarb on this issue.
 

pellicle

Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
1,175
Location
Finland
Format
4x5 Format

so do you have negs and are printing them to scan?

Just scan the negs ... WAY WAY easier (even if you think its a hassle)

other wise scan the prints, matte is better
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
I usually prefer to scan the negs, saving one generation of reproduction, unless there is some part of the print process that can only be shown by scanning a print, such as toning or a handcoated process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…