My scanning tips on scanning strips

[Daniel van Eijmeren]

(If you're not interesting in scanning pictures, you might want to skip
this message.)

DONALD MARKSTEIN to OLIVIER, 18-04-2001:

>> [Gottfredson?] (Yes, I intend to scan a few strips, but it takes a lot
>> of time to scan them-- the image rarely runs parallel to the paper so it
>> take several scans to get it right-- and to clean them up-- as sharp and
>> as true b&w as possible , not fuzzy dark gray & yellowish white)

If a scan of b/w (monographic) or greyscale art looks slightly yellowish, 
it might be useful to turn the scan into greyscale with the software. In 
the result, the yellowish paper will look white, while the b/w or 
greyscale art still looks the same.

> Get newer software! Most graphics software nowadays allows you to rotate
> the image in fractions of a degree, so you can straighten it out without
> taking the time to re-scan it.
>
> As for cleaning up the images -- I take the point of view that the
> computerized image never contains truer information about the original, 
> than when it first comes out of the scanner.

Agreed. I think that if a scan of a rare publication is retouched, it
should be *mentioned*. A retouched scan doesn't give true information 
about how an original comic really looked.

But, I also look at *rotating* as cleaning up the image. If the scan
doesn't have enough detail ("dots per inch"), mismatching lines can 
be seen in the rotated result (depending on the software and the 
options used). 

In general, this is how I make scans:

First, I clean the glass, which is THE way of avoiding the most 
unnecessary specks: the ones created by the scanner itself.

- A loose paper: I put the paper on the scanner's glass, keeping it on
  it's place with a thick *white* carton. (Coloured carton will shine
  through the paper.) When I close the lid, the air between the glass and
  the lid will not move the paper, because of the white carton's weight.

- A thick book or comic album: I put the book/album on the scanner, with 
  another heavy book on it. I *don't* close the lid. While scanning I
  manually push the material against the glass. If the book used as weight
  is heavy enough, this pushing will not move the image while it is
  scanned. I avoid looking at the scanner being at work. The times 
  I didn't weren't very pleasant experiences for my eyes. :-)


If scans are put on internet, it's also important to pay attention to the 
scan's compression (the type and the software used for it). 

Though GIFs are often being used for scans of comics, these comics are 
mostly reproduced more faithfully with a good *JPEG* compression, because
these scans have more in common with a full colour picture than with the
GIF format which is limited to only 256 tones (trying to simulate the 
pallet's in-between colours when the dithering-option is checked).

My experience is that with comic book scans, a good JPEG compression gives
a smaller file-size with a better result than a GIF-compression.

GIF compression works best if areas of colour *really* (absolutely) are
the same. If they are and match with the GIF's pallet, making dithering 
unnessesary, then the compressed result is identical to the original 
(but with a smaller file size).

If a monographic (line art) or 256 tones scan is being shrunk in (image)
size with software, then first give the scan a full colour property 
(before shrinking it). Otherwise the shrunk image art will look distorted,
having mismatching lines, etc. 

> Everything else -- brightening it up, adjusting the contrast,
> de-specking, etc. -- is something YOU add. Of course, you want it to 
> look as good as possible, but if you concentrate on just getting the 
> material out, the person downloading it can do the add-ons for himself, 
> to his own taste.

Depending on available webspace (and spare time) it's also possible to
use a cleaned up image for website presentation, with a link to the scan
as it came out of the scanner (or, if found on internet, as it was
downloaded).


Best wishes,

--- Daniel