Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 08:15 am
Whew, that was a long trip this time!

Louisville is a city where everything I see happens in slow motion. I think even gravity is slow there.

The square dance in NH was fun except that I got sick. I do not recommend REM sleep during a 103.6 degree fever. Very disturbing.

Spent a week in Natick helping sort fifty years of accumulated photographs stored in my parents' house. What a project! With both my mother and father graciously answering questions, I got stuff categorized and roughly sorted by topic. My mother is immeasurably pleased with this, as now each category is small enough that she can face culling and storing. I do wish I'd had a little more time to be social with my brother and sister, though. Hrm. Next visit.

Car still in storage at the repair place. Must phone this morning and make arrangements for pickup.
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 09:05 am (UTC)
Welcome back! I was thinking of you while dancing last night, and hoping that all was well in your world. It's a real pleasure to see your picture on my friends page again.

I agree about REM sleep while feverish. I had a bout with something vile just before Christmas, and it produced similar fever dreams.
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 10:14 am (UTC)
Why thank you! Good to "see" you again!

Ick, I hope your "something vile" wasn't the same something vile that everyone around me seemed to be getting. It involved much worshipping of the porcelain throne. (I was spared that, though I got an extra two and a half degrees of fever.) I hope you're back to your usual hearty self!
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 10:22 am (UTC)
My "something vile" was pretty much as you describe. I think it was the sickest I've been since I was 8 years old. But anyway, it's over now.

Perhaps sometime when you're on this side of the continent again we can arrange to visit. It'd be nice, and for you I'd even endure the New Jersey and Massachussets turnpikes.
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 10:26 am (UTC)
Glad to hear you're better. Yikes.

...for you I'd even endure the New Jersey and Massachussets turnpikes.

Oh wow, you must really like me! ;-)

Yes, we definitely should arrange to visit! I would enjoy meeting you.
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 11:23 am (UTC)
Welcome back!

We are going through old photos now and inventorying, sorting, identifying and scanning. It's a job we thinking will take years.
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 12:11 pm (UTC)
Good to see you back!
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 06:26 pm (UTC)
Thank you!

Yes, to do such a job well could indeed take years. That's where my parents want to go with theirs, too. First pass was me: rough categories. Lots of identification (particularly of infants and of Mystery Ancestors) happened in that pass as well. Just before I departed for California they started pass two: culling. Pass three will be another sort: inventory-and-scan or fob-off-on-kids. I suspect the desired end result looks a lot like your desired end result.

What scanning resolutions are you using? Are you scanning yourselves or taking things (particularly small originals, eg slides) to professionals? Are you burning CDs?
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 06:27 pm (UTC)
Thanks! 8-) How were your holidays? (I'm not going to catch up on LJ; it's too much!)
Tuesday, January 7th, 2003 10:23 pm (UTC)
I'm using 200 percent on a 600 dpi scanner. I'm loading as many photos on the bed as possible, then saving the scan in both .tif and .jpg formats. I can't even view the .tifs at the moment, my computer just doesn't have the guts, but I saving those to CDs as archives. I'm also saving the .jpg group scans as archives. Then I'm breaking the scans down as separate images. For instance, scan 091.jpg has four images which are labled Image 091-01.jpg through Image 091-04.jpg and cataloged by image number. I know this isn't the best way to do this, but it's the best we've been able to come up with at the moment and it's got us moving. We waited quite a while trying to come up the perfect way to do this, then decided we'd be waiting forever.
Wednesday, January 8th, 2003 08:58 am (UTC)
Thank you for the info! Actually, your plan sounds pretty darn good. And as you say, it gets you going, which is the important bit!

What are the .tifs for?

Are you saving these scans mainly for online viewing, or do you expect to print things from time to time? (I think my parents haven't given up on the idea of printing enormous framed pictures from any given one of these originals, so they're haggling about ENORMOUS resolution in the scans.) Along that same vein, are you planning to keep the originals or get rid of them?

Do you have any slides? Those are teeeeny! My parents have oodles of slides.

Feel free to ignore me if I'm being a pest. I am curious because I know nothing of this sort of process. Anything I can learn and pass on to them is a bonus.
Wednesday, January 8th, 2003 04:35 pm (UTC)
*hugs* You are not a pest at all!

The .tifs are for printing. I'm no where near an expert (although I expect [livejournal.com profile] jdecker is) but, as I understand it, .tifs are a perferred format for printing because the offer the most information about a photo, hence their enormous size. .jpgs, on the other hand, remove lots of information (I've been told that if a large quantity of the sky is blue, for instance, that .jpg format will remove information about each pixel and just say "duplicate this" however many times it takes to make up that portion of sky) which makes the overall file size much, much smaller. The difference becomes apparent between the two when it comes time to print them out.

All that said, we are saving in both formats whenever possible, and putting them on seperate disks. As far as the originals go, my wife is trying to preserve them in archival quality containers. As we get scans finished, we will forward them to the various relatives for their viewing pleasure (and maybe trade goods down the road, like more CDs, archival containers, etc.) and to encourage them to provide even more material they might have squirreled away.

At one point I joked about starting a business doing nothing but scanning documents and photographs, but the more I think about it, the less it sounds like a joke. There could be a little extra cash in work at home scanning.

As far as slides go, I've seen various attachments that work with scanners to scan slides. Most involve a mirror of some sort that picks up the scanner's light and illuminates the slide as the scanner's sensor goes by. I haven't been happy with the results of any of the ones I've seen. My poor results may be a lack of skill on my part, but I'd be interested in the opinion of a professional on the subject.

Finally, my wife has informed me that the love of digging up dead relatives is called genealogy, not incestus necrophilia.