| Author |
|
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 15 May 2010 at 8:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Ed asked me again in another thread what kind of scanner I use to get sharp label scan results. There's more to it than that, so for the benefit of anyone who wishes to scan their record/tape/CD labels or sleeves, I'll share my procedure, starting with the basics:
Begin by wiping both the object and the glass scanning surface that will rest on the object with a microfiber cloth. The last thing you'll want to see on your scans is dust, and this is a quick way to minimize it.
Getting the label properly centered is a royal pain, so I take the attitude that I don't ever want to have to re-scan the same object some years down the road. You'll never know when you might want to print a high-quality copy, use it in that book you'll be writing or be using it in an overhead projector at a Top 40 Music On CD alumni convention in 2035, so go for the maximum practical size and quality. Think of this in the same way you rip vinyl records to digital. Sure, you may want to make a lossy file for everyday listening, but you'll also want to keep that original wav file you slaved over as an archived file for future use. Same deal for scanning: Lower resolution and smaller size for online or monitor display purposes, and a larger, high quality file for achival use.
Go for a larger resolution than you'll ever think you'll need. On all of my label scans, I use 1200 dpi. For a typical 45 label, that produces a huge uncompressed file over 55 MB in size! If you know you won't need the scan for high-quality purposes, then you can go much lower. I made a couple of CD-R collections many years back of local artists, and did label scans for the booklets. When the local broadcasting museum wanted label photos, I printed them out... and at life size, they were nothing but fuzz. So go for that initial quality.
Do a preview scan and check the results. It will likely take several preview scans and object repositionings before everything is properly centered. Move the horizontal masking tool lines up or down to see how the title and artist lines square up on the left and right sides and reposition the object as needed until they're horizontally even. If the typesetting was done sloppily, pick whichever part you'll be looking at the most and center accordingly.
Now it's time to look at your scanner's settings. The automatic setting on my HP produces an okay result, but you can do much better with manual settings. It's all in the lighting. My HP scanner's preview window has a setting for "lighten/darken." Within this setting are three variable adjustments: highlights, shadows and midtones. I've found that I get superior results by primarily adjusting the highlights and midtones settings. Raising the amount of highlight really brightens up the label and hides some minor label imperfections, smudges, etc., but going too far washes out the colors. Darkening the midtones will bring out the colors again within reason. If you have a black label with silver print or a label with lighter-than-usual black title ink, this is where you can compensate a great deal. Play with these two settings until you find the "sweet spot." The shadow setting can also help, but use it very sparingly, if you must. If you go too far one way or another, click "reset" or its equivalent to go back to the automatic lighten/darken settings and try it again. It does take some trial and error each time. This is probably the most important step in making your images really look great. I've found that adjusting the brightness and shadings settings with a photo editor after doing the scan is nowhere near as effective at producing great-looking results. Once you're satisfied with the preview results, choose the resolution and do an actual scan.
Of course, a 1200 dpi image is going to be far too enormous to fit on your monitor at 100% size, but it's quite useful for touching up purposes, plus the image stays sharp. When you're done editing the image, save the scan in a non-compressed photo format, such as .TIF.
Now that you've saved the huge scan, it's time to re-size the image for your specific purposes. For the label scans I link to on the board, I re-size the huge scan to a height of 4.25 inches at 125 dpi, then save the results as a .TIF in a separate folder. This is now your "working copy" of the image.
Think of this next step as making a mono 45 mix from the mixdown tape that will sound great on AM radio. The re-sized .TIF file is your mixdown (from that 55MB master tape) and you're now ready to make an image that will pop out of that display monitor. If you're using Photoshop, use the basic "sharpen" filter, and that should do it. Save the result in .jpeg format. The quality setting requirement varies depending on the colors. Mostly white promo labels can be compressed at lower quality settings than most colors, while lots of red means higher quality is necessary to avoid bleeding. If the finished .jpeg doesn't measure up to your liking, you can delete it and go back to that re-sized .TIF file to try again.
I'm looking forward to seeing the links (and ONLY links, as per Pat) to your results!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Brian W.
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2507
|
| Posted: 11 August 2010 at 9:11am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I just saw this thread, Yah.
I do much the same thing with my Epson scanner, only I make all adjustments to the image with a photo editor after scanning. (I use PhotoStudio, because it came with my computer.) I always have to adjust the contrast... the raw scan always has the contrast far too low. That's the primary reason for the difference in what Ed called clarity.
I seem to have to remove a bit of yellow from the image, too, which I usually do in the shadows or midtones -- doing it with the highlights can produce a slight blue haze over the image.
I, too, always scan in lossless (I use .bmp instead of .tif) at a large resolution (though with a record sleeve, I never go higher than 300 dpi). I always seem to have to add a bit of sharpness when reducing to a smaller size, though... it seems to introduce a slight blurriness. Not sure why.
I can sympathize with trying to get the scan straight. I generally only scan sleeves, and putting it right on the edge of the scanner cuts off about 1/32 of an inch from the image along that edge, so I frequently have to "free float" it and try to get it straight just by eyeballing it.
I sure wish I had a scanner that would scan an entire album cover at once, but such a thing is very expensive.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 11 August 2010 at 12:08pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thanks for chiming in, Brian. Considering the wide variations in scanning hardware/software and photo editors, there is no one "right" way to do the job.
You're spot-on regarding the contrast issue: manual adjustment makes a huge difference. In my case, neither Photoshop nor the ancient version of PhotoPaint I use produce the same post-scan contrast levels that I get by tweaking the scanner's adjustments after looking at the preview scan.
Your mention of having to remove some yellow from images reminded me of one thing I've encountered: more often than not, white label promo 45s that have been subjected to the rigors of airplay often show more yellow than those that have not, and I think it's because the scanner is better at picking up the oils transfered through fingerprints than the eye is. The pre-scan tweaking is the most effective way I've found of removing or at least reducing this yellowing. I usually have to go way overboard with the brightness slider before the blue haze begins to show up.
If I'm planning on printing a high-quality sleeve image, I'll go as high as 720 dpi (in spite of the long scanning/printer spooling times and huge file size) but agree that 300 is much more reasonable. Does the slight blurriness you mentioned when reducing to a smaller size also occur when you scan at an initial setting higher than 300 dpi? I've stuck with the older .tif format because I ran into fuzziness issues when I first tried re-sizing in .bmp years ago.
Boy, wouldn't that be great to have an affordable LP-sized scanner? One that also filters out shrink wrap would get my vote, for sure! :)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
edtop40
MusicFan
Joined: 29 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: 11 August 2010 at 12:38pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
one thing i've used to get the 45 label properly level is to tape it to a piece of paper or cardboard......this way you can see if it's level BEFORE you scan it....i tape on the vinyl part of the 45 as to not damage the b side label.........since you normally can't do a fraction of a rotation to get it level afterwards....
__________________
edtop40
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
The Hits Man
MusicFan
Joined: 04 February 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 665
|
| Posted: 11 August 2010 at 6:27pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I work on the hi-rez file and save the save the final work
as 1200 d.p.i., lossless. If I need to resize, i'll use it
for my master.
__________________
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: Label Scanning Tips
