Scanning old photos

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make sure to scan them at a very high resolution and on a color calibrated scanner and file format. You can easily screw this up by mistake and old photos are not replaceable. Hire an expert.

Just keep the old photos.

Digitizing and not keeping old photos is just pants on head silly.

Digital is transient.

Similar to having "wealth" in binary digits, but not cold hard assets, it's just on paper or on a screen. Not safe at all.

What is “pants on head silly” is cluttering up your life with tub after tub containing 1000s of century-old pictures, many (most?) of which you have no idea who the people are in them. And you are just going to leave the problem to your offspring to handle once you are gone? And they will sigh, and heave them into the trash can?

I’ve set aside time in the past few years to organize 1000s of pictures, dating back to 1895. Only my older sister is left to enjoy these photos, so I cull through them, throw away the mystery ones, scan the rest, and make hard-copy albums for my sister and me. Then I save the scanned photos in several places, and throw out nearly all of the hard copies. I’ve done yearly albums for DD’s pre-iPhone life, too. There was no way I was going to saddle DD with the burden and guilt of trying to decide what to do with all these - to her - random photos.

IMO, it’s not worth the stress of saving 1000s of photos because, one day, you might found out who that little girl on the pony is in 1932. It is really liberating to get rid of all this physical - and emotional - clutter.

Please consider the idea that not everyone feels like it’s a “burden” to have old photos. If you destroy the originals then you have permanently made a decision for every generation that follows. Just pass them down. It’s just a few boxes.

I am so glad my great grandmother didn’t just toss all of her old photos because if she did then I wouldn’t have been able to experience the deep connection with my ancestors that they have given me. Just because one person doesn’t care that doesn’t mean that they won’t change their mind or that some other family member or friend wouldn’t find them irreplaceable.

I would wager that a majority of people feel like me - step up, manage the clutter of old photos, end the madness - than you, who wants to keep tubs and tubs of unorganized old photos around for infinity.
.

Sounds like you feel some guilt there and are seeking approval and validation for your actions.

And who keeps pictures in "tubs"? Put them in albums, write names and dates on the back of them. Not difficult. Something to do with copious amounts of spare time.

OP keeps them in tubs! Tub containers - you got that, PP? A lot of people I know do the same.

I have not the slightest bit of guilt. I feel liberated from clutter, and happy that I was able to manage the photo issue in a way that has given my family a lot of pleasure.

I don’t care what you think of me. I’ve been clear that I disagree with your method, but so what? You do you. OP asked a question. I gave her my perspective. You gave her yours. She can decide which path to take. Or she can make her own way.

Yes I get it that you are very proud of your total lack of care for old photos but what I am trying to express is the idea that these photos are bigger than yourself. Family photos belong to the whole family, especially those who have not even been born yet. They are a priceless treasure and once you destroy them they will never exist ever again. Let future generations have a chance to connect with their own roots. Be a good steward of the artifacts that you are caring for in the present so that they can be available for others who may feel differently than you do.

Why you think it is so utterly important that a future generation hold an image in their hand versus viewing the same image in a hard copy album or online is beyond comprehension.

You are like, "Ohmugherd! Embrace the technology! It's the Betamax revolution! All my home movies on Betamax are now preserved forever!" Hard copies last the longest. Digital discs last the longest of digital, but the ability to retrieve the data could change.

DP. While hard copy is somewhat technology independent, it's also not very convenient. Further, most of the printing technologies the typical person has access to, aren't very stable. Inkjet will fade in few years. The best is dye sublimation but it's pricey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make sure to scan them at a very high resolution and on a color calibrated scanner and file format. You can easily screw this up by mistake and old photos are not replaceable. Hire an expert.

Just keep the old photos.

Digitizing and not keeping old photos is just pants on head silly.

Digital is transient.

Similar to having "wealth" in binary digits, but not cold hard assets, it's just on paper or on a screen. Not safe at all.

What is “pants on head silly” is cluttering up your life with tub after tub containing 1000s of century-old pictures, many (most?) of which you have no idea who the people are in them. And you are just going to leave the problem to your offspring to handle once you are gone? And they will sigh, and heave them into the trash can?

I’ve set aside time in the past few years to organize 1000s of pictures, dating back to 1895. Only my older sister is left to enjoy these photos, so I cull through them, throw away the mystery ones, scan the rest, and make hard-copy albums for my sister and me. Then I save the scanned photos in several places, and throw out nearly all of the hard copies. I’ve done yearly albums for DD’s pre-iPhone life, too. There was no way I was going to saddle DD with the burden and guilt of trying to decide what to do with all these - to her - random photos.

IMO, it’s not worth the stress of saving 1000s of photos because, one day, you might found out who that little girl on the pony is in 1932. It is really liberating to get rid of all this physical - and emotional - clutter.

Please consider the idea that not everyone feels like it’s a “burden” to have old photos. If you destroy the originals then you have permanently made a decision for every generation that follows. Just pass them down. It’s just a few boxes.

I am so glad my great grandmother didn’t just toss all of her old photos because if she did then I wouldn’t have been able to experience the deep connection with my ancestors that they have given me. Just because one person doesn’t care that doesn’t mean that they won’t change their mind or that some other family member or friend wouldn’t find them irreplaceable.

I would wager that a majority of people feel like me - step up, manage the clutter of old photos, end the madness - than you, who wants to keep tubs and tubs of unorganized old photos around for infinity.
.

Sounds like you feel some guilt there and are seeking approval and validation for your actions.

And who keeps pictures in "tubs"? Put them in albums, write names and dates on the back of them. Not difficult. Something to do with copious amounts of spare time.

OP keeps them in tubs! Tub containers - you got that, PP? A lot of people I know do the same.

I have not the slightest bit of guilt. I feel liberated from clutter, and happy that I was able to manage the photo issue in a way that has given my family a lot of pleasure.

I don’t care what you think of me. I’ve been clear that I disagree with your method, but so what? You do you. OP asked a question. I gave her my perspective. You gave her yours. She can decide which path to take. Or she can make her own way.

Yes I get it that you are very proud of your total lack of care for old photos but what I am trying to express is the idea that these photos are bigger than yourself. Family photos belong to the whole family, especially those who have not even been born yet. They are a priceless treasure and once you destroy them they will never exist ever again. Let future generations have a chance to connect with their own roots. Be a good steward of the artifacts that you are caring for in the present so that they can be available for others who may feel differently than you do.

Why you think it is so utterly important that a future generation hold an image in their hand versus viewing the same image in a hard copy album or online is beyond comprehension.

You are like, "Ohmugherd! Embrace the technology! It's the Betamax revolution! All my home movies on Betamax are now preserved forever!" Hard copies last the longest. Digital discs last the longest of digital, but the ability to retrieve the data could change.

BETAMAX!! #DEEPCUT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make sure to scan them at a very high resolution and on a color calibrated scanner and file format. You can easily screw this up by mistake and old photos are not replaceable. Hire an expert.

Just keep the old photos.

Digitizing and not keeping old photos is just pants on head silly.

Digital is transient.

Similar to having "wealth" in binary digits, but not cold hard assets, it's just on paper or on a screen. Not safe at all.

What is “pants on head silly” is cluttering up your life with tub after tub containing 1000s of century-old pictures, many (most?) of which you have no idea who the people are in them. And you are just going to leave the problem to your offspring to handle once you are gone? And they will sigh, and heave them into the trash can?

I’ve set aside time in the past few years to organize 1000s of pictures, dating back to 1895. Only my older sister is left to enjoy these photos, so I cull through them, throw away the mystery ones, scan the rest, and make hard-copy albums for my sister and me. Then I save the scanned photos in several places, and throw out nearly all of the hard copies. I’ve done yearly albums for DD’s pre-iPhone life, too. There was no way I was going to saddle DD with the burden and guilt of trying to decide what to do with all these - to her - random photos.

IMO, it’s not worth the stress of saving 1000s of photos because, one day, you might found out who that little girl on the pony is in 1932. It is really liberating to get rid of all this physical - and emotional - clutter.

Please consider the idea that not everyone feels like it’s a “burden” to have old photos. If you destroy the originals then you have permanently made a decision for every generation that follows. Just pass them down. It’s just a few boxes.

I am so glad my great grandmother didn’t just toss all of her old photos because if she did then I wouldn’t have been able to experience the deep connection with my ancestors that they have given me. Just because one person doesn’t care that doesn’t mean that they won’t change their mind or that some other family member or friend wouldn’t find them irreplaceable.

I would wager that a majority of people feel like me - step up, manage the clutter of old photos, end the madness - than you, who wants to keep tubs and tubs of unorganized old photos around for infinity.
.

Sounds like you feel some guilt there and are seeking approval and validation for your actions.

And who keeps pictures in "tubs"? Put them in albums, write names and dates on the back of them. Not difficult. Something to do with copious amounts of spare time.

OP keeps them in tubs! Tub containers - you got that, PP? A lot of people I know do the same.

I have not the slightest bit of guilt. I feel liberated from clutter, and happy that I was able to manage the photo issue in a way that has given my family a lot of pleasure.

I don’t care what you think of me. I’ve been clear that I disagree with your method, but so what? You do you. OP asked a question. I gave her my perspective. You gave her yours. She can decide which path to take. Or she can make her own way.

Yes I get it that you are very proud of your total lack of care for old photos but what I am trying to express is the idea that these photos are bigger than yourself. Family photos belong to the whole family, especially those who have not even been born yet. They are a priceless treasure and once you destroy them they will never exist ever again. Let future generations have a chance to connect with their own roots. Be a good steward of the artifacts that you are caring for in the present so that they can be available for others who may feel differently than you do.

Why you think it is so utterly important that a future generation hold an image in their hand versus viewing the same image in a hard copy album or online is beyond comprehension.

You are like, "Ohmugherd! Embrace the technology! It's the Betamax revolution! All my home movies on Betamax are now preserved forever!" Hard copies last the longest. Digital discs last the longest of digital, but the ability to retrieve the data could change.

DP. While hard copy is somewhat technology independent, it's also not very convenient. Further, most of the printing technologies the typical person has access to, aren't very stable. Inkjet will fade in few years. The best is dye sublimation but it's pricey.

Don't stores still offer photo printing booths? Only ever had pictures professionally printed the old fashioned way since world went digital in 2000s, but was wondering about those DIY booths at stores, where you plug in a USB and select and print what you want.

[Anonymous]

The quality of scans of old photos is very dependent on the exact process used and the technical know-how of the person managing the project. One wrong choice could corrupt the file data or make the scans unusable. A photographic print has detail far beyond that of what an average scan could preserve. The best and most accurate source of image data is always the original image.

This. There will be better scanners in the future. If you throw away the originals now, you will never have a chance to get better scans. It's sort of like people who had 16mm home movies transferred to VHS in the 1980s and threw away the film. If they had kept the original, they could have a beautiful 4K scan made now, but they are now stuck with a miserable VHS copy (if that even survived) because they were shortsighted.

Also, the original material usually contains metadata--notes on the back, stamps from the photofinisher, etc. This can be vital when trying to identify the subject of a photograph.

Anyway, as someone knowledgable about photography, digital storage, and archival practices (through different jobs and hobbies), I would say this: scan anything that is extremely valuable and/or which you want to share online with people. Post the images online and distribute them widely to ensure that someone, somewhere will have a copy in the future even if your house burns down. But definitely keep the originals, or at least give them to someone who cares. Don't toss them in the trash. If anything, sell them on Ebay. There is a market for this stuff.

And, yes, for anyone who is taking pictures now with a digital camera--print anything and everything that you value and want to have in the future. You don't need to print every close-up of a flower, but definitely print the pictures of your kids, your pets, and your friends. By "prints," I mean proper silver-halide prints from a photo lab, not some inkjet garbage. Digital storage is great in many ways, but most people are just one failed storage device away from losing important memories, and even families that have an "archivist" family member might not have easy access to files if that person dies or is incapacitated. Printed photographs will survive all of that, as well as technological change.

[Anonymous]

PP here. Also, store photographs in acid-free albums or boxes. Don't use regular cardboard boxes and definitely don't use "magnetic" photo albums (the ones with a light coating of glue on the pages).

[Anonymous]

A lot of hoarding behavior on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of hoarding behavior on this thread.

Oh please. Storing old photographs is not hoarding wtf.

Hoarding is keeping every newspaper you ever read or keeping all of the cardboard boxes that you get from Amazon. Photographs are valuable and should be preserved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of hoarding behavior on this thread.

1/10 troll.
WEF?