Quality of scanned photos for reprint?

[LordSnailz]

hope this is the right place ... I haven't scanned anything in like years but I would imagine scan quality has improved a lot.

Is it possible to scan a printed picture and print from the scan image and still have relatively good resolution?

A friend of mine took his little newborn and did one of those professional session type things and the pictures turned out great! But what they didn't know was that after paying for the expensive session fee, they had to buy the whole set of proofs instead of the option to pick the ones they want if they wanted the digital copies. Of course, buying the whole set put them in the several thousands, near $3500.

Is possible for them buy the prints they only want and scanned them and print off of the scanned images?

 

[bobdole369]

Fairly poor quality reprints come from scanned prints. However your mileage may vary, whats good for you or your friend may be horrible for me or my friend. Prints are 2 generations away from the original, and those reprints would be 4 generations. It is probably OK to scan them to put them on the web though - at least like 800x600 versions.

Negatives are key to making reprints (with a negative scanner). Unfortunately I'm fairly sure you won't get them - or the original RAW or JPG file if he shot digital.

 

[shocksyde]

Copyright? Don't care?

 

[extra]

"they had to buy the whole set of proofs instead of the option to pick the ones they want if they wanted the digital copies"

Lol, wow, that sucks. I guess the lesson is read the fine print, and always ask first how much it is going to cost to get the copyright and "negatives".

 

[rivan]

As bobdole369 said, your results will be somewhere between 'not good' and terrible from my perspective.

As shocksyde said, they're copyrighted work. And while I'm sometimes flexible about fair use, etc - this is not one of those times. You're cutting directly into this guy's livelihood.

I think your friend is misunderstanding something if the photographer is pushing the whole set. As for charging a sitting fee, that's covering the photographer's time and investment in making the proofs you're holding, because he knows full well that some (probably large) percentage of his clients are going to screw him by scanning and printing the proofs. Just like you're proposing.

 

[LordSnailz]

Originally posted by: rivan
As bobdole369 said, your results will be somewhere between 'not good' and terrible from my perspective.

As shocksyde said, they're copyrighted work. And while I'm sometimes flexible about fair use, etc - this is not one of those times. You're cutting directly into this guy's livelihood.

I think your friend is misunderstanding something if the photographer is pushing the whole set. As for charging a sitting fee, that's covering the photographer's time and investment in making the proofs you're holding, because he knows full well that some (probably large) percentage of his clients are going to screw him by scanning and printing the proofs. Just like you're proposing.

I had the exact same feeling about paying for the pictures ... I've gone through it myself for our wedding, where there's a fee for hiring the photographer the day of, and the pictures/album/etc are a separate cost.

I told him it's only fair to the photographer to pay for the pictures, album, etc. and he totally understands this but what irks him and me as well is that you can't pick the pictures you want to keep, it's a all or nothing thing apparently. I talked to my share of photographer for our wedding a few yrs. ago and they also allow you to pick your favorites vs requiring you to purchase the whole set.

To be clear, he's allowed to pick the individual prints but not the individual digital copies.

I guess he can order extra prints ... but still though, it's understandable why he would want the digital copies ... collages, greeting cards, etc

 

[extra]

Yeah. This is a very good example of why this kind of stuff needs to really clearly be gone over first. If the photographer said nothing about this and it isn't written in his stuff as his policy, then ugh, the guy is slimy and you shouldn't feel too bad about making a scan and a print for putting on the web or something... But if it was right there in their policy, then yeah, shoulda read it more carefully. Photographers that make a living from it should, imho, adapt to the new digital age by:

1. Raising the price of the shoot and time itself
2. Then not worrying about copyright, assign all permissions except the sale of prints to the customer

That way everyone knows ahead of time what they are getting, the photographer knows immediately how much they will make with no guess work and no pressure to sell stuff afterwards... The customer also doesn't need to worry about down the road going and getting a print for grandma, or whatever. Photographer should raise the price of their time and shoot session to be what it would have been on average if they sold prints, before hand. Imho, of course. The photographers work NEEDS TO BE RESPECTED .. BUT.. the way the digital age works needs to be realized and not ignored.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: extra
Yeah. This is a very good example of why this kind of stuff needs to really clearly be gone over first. If the photographer said nothing about this and it isn't written in his stuff as his policy, then ugh, the guy is slimy and you shouldn't feel too bad about making a scan and a print for putting on the web or something... But if it was right there in their policy, then yeah, shoulda read it more carefully. Photographers that make a living from it should, imho, adapt to the new digital age by:

1. Raising the price of the shoot and time itself
2. Then not worrying about copyright, assign all permissions except the sale of prints to the customer

That way everyone knows ahead of time what they are getting, the photographer knows immediately how much they will make with no guess work and no pressure to sell stuff afterwards... The customer also doesn't need to worry about down the road going and getting a print for grandma, or whatever. Photographer should raise the price of their time and shoot session to be what it would have been on average if they sold prints, before hand. Imho, of course. The photographers work NEEDS TO BE RESPECTED .. BUT.. the way the digital age works needs to be realized and not ignored.

Amen to that. The old model of charging sky-high fees for each print is going the way of the dinosaur, especially in today's economy.

There will still be top tier photogs that can name their own price, but for the rest of us, a new generation of photographers are offering more modern packages that charge a larger session fee and produce digital copies or prints for a lower cost.

It sounds like your friend is in a hostage situation, and I would never give a photographer like that my business (nor would I run a business like that).