--- Garry F Bell <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I have been sent, by e-mail a number of digital photos of wills and > conveyacing instruments which are sonewhat lengthy and quite > difficult to > read. What would be the best way to be able ro read them and > perhaps print > them onto hard copy. > Garry, What format are your photos in? JPEG (.jpg file)? And what resolution (or "megapixels" of the camera they were taken with? There is only so much information in the digital picture, so if they're hard to read now, there may be a limit to what you can do. What software are you using to view and print the photos? Irfanview (www.irfanview.com) is a FREE graphic wiewer program for Windows. It's easy to use, and has a pretty good set of features. Or there's Photoshop (or a "limited" Photoshop Elements or LE), or PaintShop Pro. With any of these programs, you could zoom in on areas of your wills etc, to make it easier to read. You could also try adjusting contrast, colors, or using "sharpness" filters to bring out more detail. You would use any of these programs to do the printing, too. But unless you have a really good printer, you may not get readable copies. You could try selecting a smaller area of interest in your photo and blowing it up to a printer page size. An alternative, if like me you don't have a photo printer, is to send digital files to a photo shop for printing. Most "one hour" photo places can do digital prints; they're better than you can do with a home printer, and probably cost less. Kraig __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

Hi Ron, I'm not sure you are right. I was reading my camera manual last night and it says: Use the interface cable to attach the camera directly to a USB port on the computer, not through a USB hub. The connection may not operate correctly through a USB hub. I've found this with a friend's external CD writer. It worked when attached directly to the computer but not when attached to the hub she had. Other devices like scanner worked perfectly through the hub. I can't recall where but I've also recently read that if a device wasn't being recognised properly on one USB port, using another often caused it to be recognised. Just my experience and reading. I don't understand why. Cathy At 04:26 9/03/2005, Ronald Boyd wrote: >Donna, > >There must be something else in the mix. > >The USB ports on the front of a computer are simply a hub - an unpowered one >at that -- connected to the USB Card by a cable similar to the one that you >have connected to your printer. Granted the signal starts out powered (as >are the other 2/4 (external) ports on the Card) but that power is lost as >soon as it is connected to the hub. (These ports are actually designed to be >used with low/no power consuming devices like a mouse or a keyboard.) > >Therefore, if you are lucky enough to have a device that works on an >unpowered USB port, it should work even better (or, at least, no worse) from >a powered outlet... either at the rear of the computer or at a separate >powered hub. > >Ron

Cathy, What you are saying is correct. Your understanding of the issue, however, may be at fault. Perhaps if I explain it this way: Pretend that you have gone to the store and purchased an electrical extension cord. At one end is a male plug and at the other is three female connections. You would then plug the male end into a wall socket. Let's call the wall socket a "Card." You would then have a cable connected to a "card" and at the opposite end would be a "hub" into which you could plug three separate devices. This is exactly what a USB Hub is -- despite the fancy moniker. Now, even though there is a power drop in the electrical extension cord it is generally not a problem unless the device requires an extraordinary amount of energy. The energy from a USB card, on the other hand, is not very strong to begin with and most (but certainly, not all) USB devices need the maximum amount. This is why most manufacturers discourage the use of a USB Hub. On the other hand, a "powered" USB Hub gets its power from the (above mentioned) wall socket and, therefore, has power to spare. Again, this is device specific and some work with an unpowered hub and some (most?) don't... some do sometimes and don't at other times. Now, the other point you raise has to do with the device driver. When you first connect a USB device to your computer a "driver" is installed that controls the device. Sometimes the driver will only believe the device is connected to that same port each time. It's more complicated than this but you get the point. Ron -----Original Message----- From: Cathy Pinner [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 4:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [SP] Re: Scanner Reinstalling Problems Hi Ron, I'm not sure you are right. I was reading my camera manual last night and it says: Use the interface cable to attach the camera directly to a USB port on the computer, not through a USB hub. The connection may not operate correctly through a USB hub. I've found this with a friend's external CD writer. It worked when attached directly to the computer but not when attached to the hub she had. Other devices like scanner worked perfectly through the hub. I can't recall where but I've also recently read that if a device wasn't being recognised properly on one USB port, using another often caused it to be recognised. Just my experience and reading. I don't understand why. Cathy At 04:26 9/03/2005, Ronald Boyd wrote: >Donna, > >There must be something else in the mix. > >The USB ports on the front of a computer are simply a hub - an unpowered one >at that -- connected to the USB Card by a cable similar to the one that you >have connected to your printer. Granted the signal starts out powered (as >are the other 2/4 (external) ports on the Card) but that power is lost as >soon as it is connected to the hub. (These ports are actually designed to be >used with low/no power consuming devices like a mouse or a keyboard.) > >Therefore, if you are lucky enough to have a device that works on an >unpowered USB port, it should work even better (or, at least, no worse) from >a powered outlet... either at the rear of the computer or at a separate >powered hub. > >Ron ==== SCANNERS-PHOTOS Mailing List ==== To subscribe or unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] or [email protected] with the single word SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ============================== Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.3 - Release Date: 3/7/2005 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.3 - Release Date: 3/7/2005

Donna, There must be something else in the mix. The USB ports on the front of a computer are simply a hub - an unpowered one at that -- connected to the USB Card by a cable similar to the one that you have connected to your printer. Granted the signal starts out powered (as are the other 2/4 (external) ports on the Card) but that power is lost as soon as it is connected to the hub. (These ports are actually designed to be used with low/no power consuming devices like a mouse or a keyboard.) Therefore, if you are lucky enough to have a device that works on an unpowered USB port, it should work even better (or, at least, no worse) from a powered outlet... either at the rear of the computer or at a separate powered hub. Ron -----Original Message----- From: Donna [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 8:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [SP] Re: Scanner Reinstalling Problems I have an older printer that I brought out of moth balls. It won't work unless I use the port on the front of the PC and not the back. Donna

I have an older printer that I brought out of moth balls. It won't work unless I use the port on the front of the PC and not the back. Donna

Donna, My old camera was less than 1 megapixel - it produced images 640x480 pixels. If I'd managed a crystal clear image I could get a legible print at original size - but no where near as good as a photocopy. I rarely wanted a printout so that didn't matter so much. I bought the camera in 1999. I found last year that I'd stopped taking photos of people and scenery as it didn't produce enough pixels for a reasonable print or to fill my new computer screen. It also wasn't good at indoor photos of people unless the light was very good. It had a flash but needed good light to focus. Manual focus didn't help in poor light as the LCD wasn't visible enough. I was only taking wildflower closeups and documents. With the advent of more documents on the internet and being able to zoom in to them to read difficult bits I was finding document shots more unsatisfactory as well. That's why I started thinking about a new camera and decided to get the best I could afford with the characteristics I needed - like being able to carry it in a pocket - and ended up with the Canon Powershot S70. It's opened up a whole new world :-) The automatic settings are giving good photos but I am making an effort to learn more. One feature that could prove useful for big documents is the Stitch feature. You take a series of photos and the software puts them together. You can tell it whether it was a panorama as in you took the photos from the same position or big document where you've moved the camera along. It found a beach panorama a bit difficult to line up as there wasn't enough bigger objects to match so suspect it may be necessary to place a small contrasting object on the page to aid that. Has anyone any experience of this? Cathy At 00:12 7/03/2005, Donna wrote: >Like Kraig said, anyone have any suggestions on using digital cameras to >copy books, documents, etc? I have an older Sony Mavica (MVC-FD73) that >uses the 3 1/2 disk. Maybe I don't really know how to accomplish it, but >I have tried to photo copy, book pages & it doesn't come out very well. >Maybe tell us what kind of cameras, settings, etc. to use. > >Donna

It is on a powered hub. I don't think I've ever had it on the back of the computer. Will give that a try. Thanks J Charles Newfield wrote: > Try a different USB position. Is the USB connection on a separate hub or on > the computer? Is it on the front or on the back of the computer. The best > USB connection seems to be on the back of my computer. I had the same > problem with my scanner and my Cannon S900 printer. I had to uninstall the > scanner, then install the printer, then reinstall the scanner. I haven't > had a problem since. > > Charlie Newfield > The Villages, FL > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Joyce Ragels" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 11:30 AM > Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [SP] Information from List > > > :I have an HP 5550c and basically love it. It does not get along well > : with my digital camera software. I have started downloading pictures > : from the camera by allowing the computer to believe it is a removable > : disk. Every since I started doing that, I've had no problems in that > area. > : > : I do have another occasional problem that I have no clue exactly what > : causes it. For whatever reason, my computer can not find my scanner. I > : end up having to uninstall it, unplug it, reboot, install it, plug it in > : and reboot and then all is well until it throws a fit again. > : > > > > -- Joyce Ragels There are three things that only God knows: the beginning of things, the cause of things, and the end of things. - Welsh Proverb

Try a different USB position. Is the USB connection on a separate hub or on the computer? Is it on the front or on the back of the computer. The best USB connection seems to be on the back of my computer. I had the same problem with my scanner and my Cannon S900 printer. I had to uninstall the scanner, then install the printer, then reinstall the scanner. I haven't had a problem since. Charlie Newfield The Villages, FL ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joyce Ragels" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 11:30 AM Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [SP] Information from List :I have an HP 5550c and basically love it. It does not get along well : with my digital camera software. I have started downloading pictures : from the camera by allowing the computer to believe it is a removable : disk. Every since I started doing that, I've had no problems in that area. : : I do have another occasional problem that I have no clue exactly what : causes it. For whatever reason, my computer can not find my scanner. I : end up having to uninstall it, unplug it, reboot, install it, plug it in : and reboot and then all is well until it throws a fit again. :

Regarding camera shake, when I take photos of a microfilm image, I be sure to position the camera as close to the center of the image as possible and have it far enough away from the image so that I can rest the hand that is holding the camera against the top of the microfilm reader. Yes, there will be some curvature of the image but it will be clear if focused correctly. Dennis

Donna, I have the exact same Sony Mavica you mention and I think the primary problem with using it to copy documents has to do with its low resolution. It's only a 1 megapixel (MP) camera and that isn't enough to get a satisfactory image blown up to 8x10. I acquired a 4 MP a couple of years ago and use it for shots of documents, books, microfilm images, etc., and it does a great job. I don't enjoy suggesting to folks that their equipment can't do the job but in this case it really comes down to the math. A 1 MP camera image is not going to allow it to be resized to 8x10 without a distinct loss of clarity. If you're serious about getting some good document images with a digital camera, I would think you'd need at least a 3 MP. No matter what you do, I believe you'll always be disappointed with the Mavica for this purpose. The Mavica is a great camera though for images you want to post on a web page or send via email. Dennis

Hi John, I have turned off the flash - but not tried the two light sources. I've read about that but can't see how it works. I guess it's time to try it out. They must even out the light in some way. Yes it's good to be able to experiment. Now to understand the EXIF stuff more so that I can more easily review what I've tried with camera settings. Cathy At 09:52 7/03/2005, John Zillwood wrote: >>My main problem in photographing photographs is the light reflecting >>on the surface of the photo or the camera being mirrored on the surface of a >>glossy photo. Does anyone know a solution to this? > >Try turning the flash off and using two light sources, one from each side >angled at about 45 degrees to the subject. Experiment with the camera >settings, etc.. It's not like you're wasting a roll of 35mm film :-) > >John Zillwood

Thanks Kraig, I know very little about focal length and the differences it makes. I'm sure you must be talking optical zoom. Digital zoom is fun but so far I've found it more difficult to focus - and I know it is just zooming as you can on the computer screen. I suspect it is better to do Digital zooming on the computer rather than with the camera though no doubt I'll experiment for some time yet since I have a lot of megapixels to play with. So far I've mostly not been using all of them. I don't have as significant curvature problems with my new camera - though there is some distortion according to the reviews - thanks for alerting me how to overcome some of it. You've prompted me to re-read reviews now that I've had a little experience and they're showing up features I've so far overlooked. They also point to glossaries and other helpful pages. Maybe worth other people putting their camera name (in quotes) and review into Google and reading some reviews. eg "canon powershot s70" review Thanks also for the tips about trying a tripod. I knew it was a good idea to actually physically see it. I've been reading that I can control the camera from the computer so that could be useful when photographing photos/books as well. Cheers, Cathy At 08:42 7/03/2005, you wrote: >Zooming the camera to the longest focal length possible (camera >farthest away from the subject) may help the curvature problem. Long >focal length lenses "flatten" the subject. But then you'll need to use >a tripod more than ever, because the long zoom exaggerates any >movement. ><snip> >Kraig

I've had a Ricoh digital camera for some years and have had some success in photographing old photos and film reader screens and books in the library. It focuses well close up. However there is a problem with curvature. I believe this is to do with the quality of the lens but not sure. I've also found it a hit and miss affair - I think mainly due to camera shake. It's hard to hold the camera steady enough. When photographing bits of microfilms I was always pleased to be able to return to the library and retake some - though others were crystal clear and most were readable. I've just bought a new digital camera - Canon Powershot S70 - and am still experimenting though managed some great shots at my brother's birthday party on the weekend, even in the dark. With it I can check immediately whether I've captured a clear image of a page or part of a page as you can zoom in when you view your shot. This is some help though I'm thinking of investing in a small tripod. I've got as far as discovering they exist - now to locate one. I bought my camera online after reading reviews but I want to physically see the tripod. My main problem in photographing photographs is the light reflecting on the surface of the photo or the camera being mirrored on the surface of a glossy photo. Does anyone know a solution to this? Cheers, Cathy At 06:48 7/03/2005, you wrote: >From: Evelyn Hendricks [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 3:01 PM > >Subject: Re: [SP] digital cameras, scanners, software, techniques, etc. > >My husband also has a Sony camera that uses the 3 1/2 inch disks. He >photgraphed a page from a deed book for me. It was legible, but the >curvature of the open page was very noticible in the end result. I tried >using it to copy some material at the library. I found it very difficutl >to >hold the camera steady enough to do that. That may be just me however. >My >hands get so shaky sometimes that I can't even type. >Somewhere on the net I saw instructions for making a support to hold the >camera while you copy pages from books, etc. There were three or four of >them listed. I will see if I can find it and let you know. >He has copied old photographs that belonged to other people. These turn >out >very well. He also copied the family information in my grandfather's >Bible. >There ws not as much curvature in that as there was in the deed. >My son has a camera that uses a memory stick. I am anxious to see how it >works at copying, etc. >Evelyn

Scan revelent passages from books borrowed from library. Photo where your ancesters lived. Gravestones war memorials. Nick Ashby England Kraig Jones wrote: >Hi, > >I've used this list a few times in the past. > >1. I've shared a few tips on using a digital camera instead of a >scanner to copy 35mm slides. I had a box full of old slides that I >wanted to copy. After a little research and experimenting, I bought >and used a digital camera to take pictures of the slides, and got at >least as good results as with a flatbed scanner with a film attachment. > And now I have a camera that is a lot more useful than a >single-purpose film scanner would be. > >2. I've read this list (and others) looking for genealogy-related uses >for digital cameras and scanners. I know people use them at libraries, >though the historical society that I visit here is very fussy about >cameras, computers, or anything that you might want to bring in. >Anyone have ideas or experiences? > >Kraig > > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com > > >==== SCANNERS-PHOTOS Mailing List ==== >To subscribe or unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] or [email protected] with the single word SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. > >============================== >New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 > > > > > >

I've found a great resource online with tons of great suggestions for using digital resources (cameras, scanners, etc.) in genealogy. Here are some links to stuff that Dennis and Carla Ridenour (formerly through the NGS newsletter) have put out for mass consumption. They have a new publication, accessible at http://groups.msn.com/DIG. The older articles are linked from this page on genealogy.com: http://genforum.genealogy.com/photo/messages/1399.html Truly is everything you ever wanted to know about digital photography in genealogy. I have photographed headstones, photos, documents, even microfilm using one of two cameras - an Olympus Camedia C-3020 Zoom and a Canon G5 with an LCD display that moves so that I don't have to stand on my tippie-toes when I photograph documents. I have a professional-strength tripod with a convertible arm, so I can lay documents on a table and photograph them. Using the same tripod, I can take photos in a more traditional vertical orientation. I used Dennis's tips and guides to use my cameras on all these different sources. Our genealogy society is working on a very ambitious project to publish genealogical data, and we are trying to save money wherever possible. Instead of making hard copies from microfilm or making photocopies, we have taken photos. We have the digital image for future reference, and it's a lot easier to store a digital image than a few thousand copies. I'm still trying to get the camera settings right, but I've gotten lots of practice at fiddling with the photos to enhance the quality using my favorite software for graphics ... free download from www.irfanview.com I can produce slideshows, batch process to resize photos, add text, etc., using this sweet little utility. I have over 15,000 headstone photos online at www.FindAGrave.com so I've had lots of practice! Heaven knows I still have a lot to learn!

> My main problem in photographing photographs is the light reflecting > on the surface of the photo or the camera being mirrored on the surface of > a > glossy photo. Does anyone know a solution to this? Try turning the flash off and using two light sources, one from each side angled at about 45 degrees to the subject. Experiment with the camera settings, etc.. It's not like you're wasting a roll of 35mm film :-) John Zillwood [email protected]

From: Evelyn Hendricks [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [SP] digital cameras, scanners, software, techniques, etc. My husband also has a Sony camera that uses the 3 1/2 inch disks. He photgraphed a page from a deed book for me. It was legible, but the curvature of the open page was very noticible in the end result. I tried using it to copy some material at the library. I found it very difficutl to hold the camera steady enough to do that. That may be just me however. My hands get so shaky sometimes that I can't even type. Somewhere on the net I saw instructions for making a support to hold the camera while you copy pages from books, etc. There were three or four of them listed. I will see if I can find it and let you know. He has copied old photographs that belonged to other people. These turn out very well. He also copied the family information in my grandfather's Bible. There ws not as much curvature in that as there was in the deed. My son has a camera that uses a memory stick. I am anxious to see how it works at copying, etc. Evelyn

--- Jean Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > Kraig, How did you take pictures of the slides? As I said, I purchased a digital camera as an alternative to a scanner with a slide attachment. The scanner that was available then was a 600 dpi model, and a 3 megapixel camera gave me more resolution over the area of a slide (as well as the advantage of the camera's portability). This was about 3 or 4 years ago; maybe scanners have improved and the equation has changed. The camera is an Olympus C-3000 Zoom, which has a macro-focus feature. You need macro focus to photograph a slide. I set the camera up on a tripod and pointed down to a slide-sorter on the desk. I moved the camera mount down to the bottom end of the tripod's post -- that just made it easier to position the camera, but wouldn't be necessary if your tripod doesn't work that way. I put the slides on a slide-sorter box (small 4 x 6 inch, battery powered, white plastic diffuser, costs about $15). A cardboard template with a 2" square cut-out in the center, and taped to the slide sorter box, holds the slides in position Set the camera to macro focus, turn off the flash, and zoom in on the slide. Experiment with auto- and manual exposure settings to find what works best. I don't recall exactly what settings I used. I found it helpful to connect the camera output to a television monitor so I could easily check the slide before I snapped the picture. Also, I used the remote-control button that came with the camera to avoid shaking. With the camera focussed and zoomed in as close as possible, I was able to get the 35mm slide picture to fill about 3/4 of the camera's field of view. I would have liked to use all the field of view, but the camera would not focus that close. Anyway, I did get some of the slide mount frames in the picture, along with labels & dates printed on the mounts, which could be useful after all. After I transferred the slides to the computer I cropped out the slide mount stuff around the edges, and maybe touched up the pictures, using Jasc Software's PaintShop Pro. > and boxes of slides from when the kids were growing up. I want to > copy the > slides to CDs for the kids to each have a copy. I also have Adope > Photoshop > Elements v3 that I am in the process of learning. I would welcome a > jump > start! I'd really like for the CDs to be usable in a DVD/CD player > so they > can see the pictures on a TV screen. > I used and recommend "Diji-Album" from www.xequte.com to make CD photo albums for family members to play back on their computers. I also tried a demo of xequte's "DVD PixPlay", which is a similar product that makes CD slideshows to play back in a DVD player. Diji-Album was easy to use, and it has some handy features, such as the ability to "extract" and print photos out of the album. Your Photoshop Elements, or software that comes with your scanner, camera, or computer may work well for you, too. Kraig __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

--- Cathy Pinner <[email protected]> wrote: > I've had a Ricoh digital camera for some years and have had some > success in > photographing old photos and film reader screens and books in the > library. > It focuses well close up. However there is a problem with curvature. Zooming the camera to the longest focal length possible (camera farthest away from the subject) may help the curvature problem. Long focal length lenses "flatten" the subject. But then you'll need to use a tripod more than ever, because the long zoom exaggerates any movement. Unless you're going to use your tripod with a heavy camera and lens, most any reasonably solid tripod should work. If you can try out a tripod, extend the legs all the way (should be easy to set up, not lots of complicated latches), then see that the tripod doesn't shake excessively. The more expensive tripods will be steadier, and lighter weight. I use an old Vivitar tripod, which works pretty well and was not expensive. Kraig __________________________________ Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/

Kraig, How did you take pictures of the slides? I recently purchased an Epson Perfection 4180 Photo flatbed scanner, and have not made my way through all the instructions for slides. I have boxes and boxes of slides from when the kids were growing up. I want to copy the slides to CDs for the kids to each have a copy. I also have Adope Photoshop Elements v3 that I am in the process of learning. I would welcome a jump start! I'd really like for the CDs to be usable in a DVD/CD player so they can see the pictures on a TV screen. Of course the kids know more about this technology than I do. I just want to surprise them! Grandmas CAN learn something new! jean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kraig Jones" To: <SCANNERS-PHOTOS-Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 7:24 AM > Hi, > 1. I've shared a few tips on using a digital camera instead of a > scanner to copy 35mm slides. I had a box full of old slides that I > wanted to copy. After a little research and experimenting, I bought > and used a digital camera to take pictures of the slides, and got at > least as good results as with a flatbed scanner with a film attachment. > And now I have a camera that is a lot more useful than a single-purpose > film scanner would be. > > Kraig