Glad it helped. How are you coming in your project?

Glad I could help!

Glad it was helpful!

Glad it was helpful!

Glad it was helpful!

personally I didn’t have much issue with dust. just wiped it between each box. As far as photo restoration, I haven’t found any batch photo restoration equal to the Epson software. You can save the original scan with it as well as the restored scan if you want, but let’s face it, these are just really old faded snapshots that you want to be able to share with family and others. These aren’t historically significant events that your scan for the sake of all humanity. With this scanner, just scan them and your done. They look great, are more than adequate, and as I demonstrated in my view, when printed are equal to or usually superior to the original print. I tested the Plustek, still think for most the Epson is the better choice.

@@cwaynefox I agree with you about the Epson software. It restored some old photos much better that some other packages that I tried, and better than I could do myself playing with adjustment for quite some time. On matt photo paper, though, as opposed to gloss, the speckling in dark areas is far more noticeable than the Plustek. The processor does not improve it. In my view, this alone makes the choice between the two much harder for those with predominantly matt prints.

Glad I could help

Glad it was helpful!

Glad it was helpful!

You are welcome!

Thanks

Glad I could help!

The epson includes software to scan documents as well. It’s a separate program, and works pretty well. I haven’t used it a lot, but comes in handy on occasion.

thanks

Thanks. I’ll test it out.

@@cwaynefox Yeah give it a try. There a many good AI noise removal programs out there. I've heard that also "ON1 NoNoise AI" is a great program. Haven't tried it myself though.

My videos are strictly from the perspective of scanning old snap shots which will naturally involve some type of color restoration ... so a critical feature. I didn’t test the Canon for straight scanning with out modifications, but it has complete color controls so you can tweak all the settings to adjust for contrast and saturation, so I would assume for straight scanning it can do a pretty good job. Color restoration is much more complex and it’s pretty difficult to adjust scanner settings to compensate and correct faded or discolored photos ... and you would have to have dozens of settings to handle to the variety of fading and discoloration. That’s what is so impressive about the Epson Color Restoration algorithms ... it seems Epson can come pretty close to figuring out what a color should be based on what it has faded to.

Enjoy it

@@cwaynefox thank you!

I hope you can locate one. Thoughts and prayers are with you as you deal with this horrible and unjust invasion of your homeland.

no point in using 1200 DPI with the FastFoto scanners, it’s just interpolating it up from 600, which a computer can do as well. To get true 1200 you need a flatbed scanner. Personally I would probably go with the v600. I should review that scanner soon. I think it will be comparable to the it’s higher end versions at a somewhat affordable price. One nice feature of Epson flatbed software is it will locate and create separate files of individual photos on the scanning bed. Not nearly as fast the FF680, but you can put 5 3x5’s on the scanner glass, and it will scan each one individually and apply Epson photo restoration if you want.

I bought a V600. It came with dust under the glass. I didn't notice for 9 months (I don't use it much). It was replaced with a reconditioned unit under warranty. Nine months later and no longer under warranty it has more dust under the glass than the first one, about half a dozen specks. Cost to clean (in UK) £180 _ about $220. It also occasionally scans my face when I lift the lid, which seems to trip some microswitch. Do yourself a favour and get a LiDE 400. At least you can throw it away.

All I do is one swipe with a clean microfiber cloth. The epson will warn you if it detects anything, and reminds you to clean the scan bar. Pretty straight forward. All that should ever get on it is dust and paper dust, nothing that actually sticks to them. I’ll do a quick swipe every one hundred prints or so, or if I haven’t used it for a while.

@@cwaynefox Much appreciated- thanks again!

I used the Elgato device ... did a video about it. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/pdCloM-B1JzIZIk.html

This is where I'm kinda torn too... Is the Epson software free? Can I scan with Canon then use Epson's AI to magically edit the photos for me? If so, it sounds like we could save a lot of money and still get good scans. 🤔

I have a synology server and use their software, such as DS Photo and DS video to share the photos and movies. For those that are shared, the compression might be controlled by DS Photo, not sure, but sharing for viewing on a device usually wants to be compressed to make them easy to upload a view. they look great on even a 70” TV . I also have them stored separately as an archive and basically it’s just a NAS with them saved in a folder, so those are the original files.

simple renumbering, never had an issue with it, pretty transparent. As far as color correcting, my videos are intended for people having thousands of old, probably faded snapshots, to scan. Epson color restoration has specific algorithms designed to deal with photographic color fading, very difficult to do efficiently with Photoshop. I’m pretty good at photoshop as well (been using it since version 1) andI can’t imagine having to color correct several thousand faded poorly colored photographs and most of the time I dont’ think I could duplicate what the Epson algorithms are doing. Somehow Epson can analyze what a color has become through fading and figure out pretty well what it was originally. If the images are not faded the Canon printer does a pretty good job of getting a “mateh” to an original, and if I remember correctly has a pretty good interface to tweak the scanning process and refine it if your goal is to get a match to an original. But you can fiddle with all the settings you want, and still can’t get the color quality of the Epson if you are trying to restore original colors of a 40 year old faded photograph.

sorry, didn’t see this. that’s a problem with the Canon and scanning old photographs that are somewhat faded ... you have to try and correct each one individually afterwards, and the Epson software is better at figuring out what a color should be based on what it has faded to throughout the image.

www.archivalmethods.com/category/boxes?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwsuSzBhCLARIsAIcdLm7jWo_wMUHvMKBU-8gcgTtzOGy_xr5t3e38LerDmPf2v5H7Lw9YEKoaAgFQEALw_wcB

Also interested in the boxes. Thx!

Did you ever get an answer?

When you say significantly slower, how many seconds per photo? Are these 3x5’s or larger? Any reason you’re scanning at 600dpi? Old snapshots generally don’t have enough detail recorded to offer any better results at 600 dpi than at 300 dpi.

@@cwaynefox the first and second batches were 4x6’s, whereas third batch were 3x5’s (actually proofs from an event). Again, while the 4x6’s slowed down to maybe 2 seconds from 1 second when increasing from 300 to 600 dpi, the third batch took several seconds for each scan like it was struggling with a buffer. Might this had something to do with the WiFi connection because I did move the location of the device for the third batch to different room??

@@elliotresnick5433 I found the wifi speeds pretty flakey at times, so I stuck with USB when doing large batches. The 2 seconds sounds pretty short for 600dpi, but admittedly I haven’t scanned anything in at 600dpi for a couple of years so my memory might be clouded. I’d try a direct connection with USB to see what the times are, and then you would have an idea how much the wifi might be slowing that down.

@@cwaynefox USB solved the issue even at 600dpi