Gizmodo’s reader photo challenge this week is particularly impressive: taking an awesome photo of you as a child and recreating it as an adult. I had promised Giz editor Danny that I’d submit my own entry, but when I went to do it, I realised something: I have done a lousy job of scanning my childhood photos.
Actually, for lousy, read “non-existent”. I have two boxes filled with photo albums and loose photos in a designated “to be scanned” area in my office, but they have been sitting there for the better part of two years now. Adding to the complications, my brother started on a comprehensive family photo scanning exercise a while ago, and I passed the oldest albums over to him. So I couldn’t even scan just one picture for the sake of the competition, since I don’t have any photos of myself right now any younger than the age of 17. At that point, I was a skinnier version of myself with floppier hair and the same abysmal fashion sense, which doesn’t make for a great contrast.
So Danny, I’m really sorry. I encourage Lifehacker readers who have done a better job of capturing their early photos to restage one of those shots and enter the challenge, and I will do so as a belated gesture when I finally get hold of a worthwhile shot. In the meantime, I’ve vowed to schedule some time on my calendar for official scanning purposes.
Peter
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 8:48 AMInstead of moaning that you have procrastinated, but shouldn’t you be doing the LifeHacker thing and write one/two/three articles on how to scan one’s photos, slides and negatives; which equipment to use, what is the best commercial equipment, and then which ones give the best bang for buck; and finally how to save, store/backup, display, and share those photos??
My father and I have been looking (on&off) for a couple of years for a good, reliable scanner that will do justice to our large collection of slides and negatives.
Angus, you can help.
Sarah
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 9:03 AMIt’s cheating, and it’s terrible quality but at a pinch, mindful of reducing the glare from any lights on the surface. Take a phone came/digital cam picture of the picture ( or get your brother to do so with his camera phone) No excuse!
John Kirkham
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 9:30 AMPeter, the best one for slides/negatives & photos is the Canon CS9000F. It’s expensive but after trying those small USB types, the quality is amazing from the Canon.
Scanning at 9600 x 9600 dpi, with the second figure being hardware rated & not software interpolated.
Todd
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 10:03 AMWe use the Epson V700 to scan X-Ray negatives into our dental system. DPI goes up to 6400 X 9600 which is more than enough for X-Rays.
AJ
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 9:58 AMI love the photo of you at the top of the article. Shall we now call you Agnes instead?
Alex Kidman
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 1:59 PMSure, blame me, as though it’s my fault or something. Just because it might possibly be true….
(That’s not a photo of Gus at the top of the page, by the way. Unless he’s had some radical plastic surgery in the past two weeks and invented time travel as well, and you’d think he’d turn at least one of those into a LH post if he did…)
Sam
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 4:07 PMSo you two are related. I’d wondered that since I saw the names on the respective Cnet/Lifehacker articles.
San Leung
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 3:33 PMPerhaps you can pay a niece or nephew to do it? Scanning old family photos is on my to do list and there is no shortcuts in doing it.