dan
I just clicked on it and it opened the download page....you may have a problem with your javascript....try using another browser.

Randy Martin

I've always had a problem with them sending the registration code. Last time I tried registering after the download had closed and it worked.

Kasey
Where did you find that information? I have read everything on their pages, but have found no such condition. (It makes no sense for them to store our photos, either, but I'm willing to learn whatever it is you know, Kasey.)

M. Aronson
"Personal Data" meaning you name and contact info, not your files.

M. Aronson
Hi, seriously? You didn't find that 'condition' registering and installing Today's Software? Asking for 'storage and processing personal data' - is that box in ADDITION to only one before (newsletters and adverts) and as I mentioned in earlier Post - Name and contact info are stored by FRANZIS anyway for those (like myself) who created account with them last December (or ealier) That's why some users find it odd and wonder what it means.

Krzysztof
Post a sample file somewhere? Or at least give more details.

JohnL
I can not put my pictures, because it's my personal data and care about privacy.

i also had problem with loading photo and wanted to have a solution for this
so i picked one random photo and error (jpeg), then loade some other smaller one and it worked

Krzysztof
If your camera default setting is at max res you may need to lower the image size to load it, I have seen this with multiple image processing programs.

D_Ramsey
In fact, you need to reduce image resolution, eg. 1024 pixel. Type program Gimp, Paint.NET, Photoshop, Picasa, Photoscape etc. without restriction, and here requires 1024 pixel. This is a joke.

Methusalem
Google GIMP colorize, & you'll get tutorials, methods etc.

Methusalem
Irfanview is also a great software I use to crop, fix, turn to B&W etc. this is a free software.
http://www.irfanview.com/

mike
some gimp examples
http://imgur.com/ZeOWiZt
http://imgur.com/4Jhh2Ps

mike
Why try to give a tutorial on grain, paper etc. Do you really think we don't know anything about photography. Where was your review on this software?

mike
Hi, thanks for pointing out that previous account info can be of help speeding up Registration process of this Giveaway. In my case it was creating account with FRANZIS for registering Color Projects Pro last December, where all that was required from us was ticking the box: 'I agree to receive product-information Newsletter from the Franzis GmbH. I can unsubscribe at any time by simply clicking the link at the bottom of every newsletter or by writing an e-mail to widerruf@franzis.de.' Indeed, from then on few (but not many) Offers arrived in my inbox, with option I could unsubscribe from receiving these newsletters.

Today's Registration (after filling address and password) requires ADDITIONAL box to be checked in: 'I agree with the storage and processing of my personal data' - and without agreeing to both - Registration is halted. So at at this point people start having concerns.. What kind of 'personal data' is collected for storage and processing?? Log-in details to account with FRANZIS are 'stored' and remembered anyway (I forgot my password for instance, and when asked for it today - came promptly by e-mail), so WHAT ELSE? Secondly - if one can unsubscribe from newsletters, what happens to our 'personal data' in the scenario when we decide not only to unsubscribe, but cancel that account altogether? Finally, is that 'storage' anything to do with FreeImage Library of this Project's 'Third-party software'?

It would be very helpful (naturally) if Franzis GmbH themselves could step in here and put people's minds at rest. I shall wait for a while yet before Registering Analog Projects to see if anyone can shed any light on this matter.

Rock My son is 23. He hasn't a clue about emulsion, granularity, fixing, dodging, burning, film speeds etc et al. Why should he? That's yesteryear stuff to him. Analog, not digital. That's what today's giveaway is largely about, too: novelty software for those who may wish to 'age' their images.

Mike was simply putting into perspective something that others here might like to know more about. His contributions to GOTD draw upon a fund of knowledge and expertise and, no, they're not pompous-sounding 'tutorials' but insights of a life-time generously delivered here in helpful, succinct guise. I look forward to the day when you give your time in the way that Mike has always done for the benefit of others.

Rock Not everyone knows exactly what too do. Some people Rely on guys like "Mike" for some Help. Mike usually posts helpful tips, etc...

Mike Thanks for ALL the Help you Contribute, and Please continue that Great Helpful Tips, Etc...
Gil

Methusalem
Having been scanning in some old films lately I will say that a number of the effects look like my "before clean-up" results. However there are a lot of fun things in this program and I think it's an interesting option to have.

Methusalem
Buy a very good scanner! B|

Methusalem
Sorry, forgot the suggestion. There are a number of good free photo programs and it depends on how you like to work and if you are PC or Mac.

You could try Lightzone which looks good but I haven't played with:
http://lightzoneproject.org/gallery/program-screenshots-mouse-over-images-see-description-click-expand

Or PixBuilder Studio on Windows which I do think is a good free program:
http://www.wnsoft.com/pixbuilder/

Methusalem
My reply assumed you had either scanned or photographed your old images. Else there are many people who will take your photos and send back scans on disk. they probably advertise in your local photographic shops.

Methusalem
You need to buy yourself a scanner which will come with software specific to your scanner. When you scan your photos you will be given several choices as to which digital format to save it in...such a tiff, gif, jpg... etc.

Methusalem
I think it's a common question, as many folks have boxes & albums full of old photos. There are 2 ways to do that -- either with a scanner, or with a digital camera, taking photos of the prints or negatives.

The camera method may be faster, but you have to invest in a camera [or camera & lens] that will fit your photos in the frame, some sort of stand, & figure out a way to light it. A more expensive camera, either alone or built into a cell phone, can give you RAW format images -- basically all the data the sensor captures -- which may allow you to make more adjustments editing.

You can buy a scanner as a stand-alone device, or as part of a All-In-One Printer [usually the AIO is much cheaper, starting at around $30]. They're best with prints rather than negatives, though some scanners will work with them. Using a camera you take the picture, set up another print or negative, take a picture & so on, whereas using a scanner you place the print on the glass [just like with a copier], and wait a minute or two while it does its work.

There are also [often inexpensive] devices made just for copying prints or negatives, combining a cheap camera, lens, light, & holder. They *may* be easier for some folks, but quality is normally on the lower end.

The software you'd use depends on how you copied the photos. If you use the camera in a cell phone, probably easiest to have the cell upload them to somewhere like Google, & then you might get away using the tools provided there, e.g. Google Photos. If you use a camera & shoot RAW, there's Therapee or sometimes given away, DxO Optics Pro. For jpg [or tif, or bmp etc.] images from a camera or scanner, if you want to edit them there are loads & loads of free apps, with The GIMP probably being the most capable, but also the software with the most to learn.

Methusalem
Most GOOD Multi-Function printers have excellent scanners built-in!

Recommend Brother as inexpensive, good quality brand...
Something like MFC-DJ870DW (around $100 or so) or a newer model in that price range... You will get excellent results and definitely worth the investment!

Methusalem
Most all-in-one printers have an adequate scanner, but if you have a lot of photos you may want to consider a single purpose scanner. These usually scan faster, have better controls, and some have very good software that come as part of the package. Plan on spending from $200 to $300 dollars. I use a CanoScan 9000F MII, but it's a couple of years old now and there may be others at this time.

Methusalem
Might I suggest you purchase a scanner for that task OR photograph the original using a good camera fixed to a tripod and using natural light.
You will then end up with digital versions of your photos.

Terry Ive
"photograph the original using a good camera fixed to a tripod and using natural light."

Just FWIW you can get simple copy stands on ebay for less $ than you'll usually pay for a tripod. I've also seen similar &/or mounts for cell phones.

Methusalem
As a keen photographer for just short of 60 years I wouldn't attempt to copy using a camera; too difficult to arrange the lighting, probably poor quality.

A scanner is by far the best way to go I have an old Canon LiDE 20 and it still as good as new in its output.
It works directly off a USB port without any external power supply and you can probably pick a similar one up for between 15 and £25.

If you do see one just check that there are drivers available for your OS, saw a LiDE 100 on eBay for £15, good hunting. :-)

XP-Man
The trouble with scanning is it takes a long time and you really want a scanner that does infra-red dust detection/removal. I've converted a lot of old film lately just by placing it on a light table and photographing it with a high-resolution DSLR (Canon 5Dsr) and a macro lens, it comes out very well, and it's very fast. The camera has lots more resolution than all the old film. You still need to invert negatives and tweak colours though.

BTW when using scanners there is a German company with a product called ColorPerfect (http://www.colorperfect.com/colorperfect.html?lang=en) who have lots of film properties included for sorting out film scans.

Thank you Methusalem for asking the question and many thanks to all who have responded. This is a very useful thread for many.

I am in the process of converting decades worth of photos, negatives, film (8 mm to analog tape). I have done many hours of homework on google and links, but the practical advise on this thread is most appreciated. I have some questions.

1) For scanning prints on AIO what is the minimum dpi resolution to look for 300, 600, 1200...for descent scans. I would use the highest dpi the AIO is capable of.

I'm wondering if I need higher than 600 dpi my Canon D480 is capable of.
Scanning Resolution 600 x 1200 dpi (optical) 9600 x 9600 dpi (enhanced)

2) For scanning negatives, slides,

Mike suggested "...inexpensive devices made just for copying prints or negatives, combining a cheap camera, lens, light, & holder. They *may* be easier for some folks, but quality is normally on the lower end.

I was about to buy one of these scanning devices for negatives and slides thinking it will give better results than my Canon EOS Rebel T2i 550D camera on stand. Apparently not? I do not care about convenience, quality of scan is most important.

Can you please elaborate / advise.

Thank you

JohnL
Purchasing a Canon DSLR and macro lens would prove a rather expensive option just a copy some old images.

Even though I'm fortunate enough to own a technical camera with a Voigtlander apo-lanthar process lens still found it best to copy my old family photographs on a scanner.

vin
I am not mike, but I can assure you that photographing will outperform vs scanning quality anytime.
Set camera to raw format, full resolution, remote release and expect to do some digital afterwork (plenty of how to instructions freely available). Monitor calibration goes without saying, same as basic knowledge of colour management. Stick to sRBG if your monitor does not cover wider range.

Sigrid.DE and All who respondedl

Thank you for the tips. I'll go with digitizing negatives and slides using Canon D480.

1) how do you hold the slide /negative?

2) How do you make sure lighting is uniform across the photo, especially since camera & tripod are close to the film and may cast shadow.

I am prepared to do all the post-digitizing work on SW. Just want to make sure I get the best digital image on camera or scanner (for prints)/

Thanks

Methusalem As others have said: buy a scanner. They're not expensive. (Or needn't be.) No camera is ever going to photograph a film negative, and yet along with all those ancient pictures you're likely to find lots of negs as well. And also boxes or carousels of slides. Trying to manage that lot without a scanner is pretty much impossible for the non-specialist user.

Do NOT waste your money on non-brand scanners; the software they come with will likely be rubbish. Go for Canon or Epson. If Epson, then the Epson V370 is outstanding value for money, and the Epson software, pretty good too. The V370 scanner will turn strips of negatives, rows of mounted slides (4 at a time) and photographic prints into digital images.

I'm progressively working my way through a vast stock of analog material -- negs, slides and prints -- which I then catalog by year and, because there's absolutely no point in doing all of that if they're simply going to be left sitting on a hard drive, I buy "digital photo albums" for archival purposes (if you're in Europe / the UK, best by far is the Dutch company Albelli, which frequently offers discounts of over 50% on standard pricing.) Hope this helps.

Thanks MikeR always appreciate your helpful comments on many GAOTD threads.

You are saying that for Negatives and slides, a dedicated scanner is better than 'Camera on stand'. The Epson V370 scans Photo, Image, Film, Negative with 4800 x 9600 dpi. Sounds great, can scan everything and costs only $99 (Amazon, Best Buy). I would get it but...

Mike (who also I respect like you, for many valuable contributions to GAOTD) said above:
"There are also [often inexpensive] devices made just for copying prints or negatives, combining a cheap camera, lens, light, & holder. They *may* be easier for some folks, but quality is normally on the lower end."

I am confused about what to believe. Have you used the Epson V370? How are the results with negatives / slides? Better than using DSLR camera?

More insight from both Mikes and others will be appreciated.

Thank you

JohnL
Not all the old film, I got 108 lines per millimetre on an Ilford film, and the old American reconnaissance planes claimed 1100 lines per millimetre. :-)

vin
if you read below you will understand what I wrote before
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/23/why-you-should-digitize-your-film-using-a-camera-instead-of-a-scanner/
after scanning the first 100 of your memorables you will either ditch the project or have it done professionally or use a digital camera.

And as for today's software as with any filter software, you do not need to know what Ilford, Agfa emulsions with what developer produced because none of these so-called analog filters mean to really emulate the stuff of yesteryear. They are fun-filters to experiment with.
Yes, photoshop can do the same. However Photoshop pure needs an awful lot of filters to stack up.
Way easier is to use some Lightroom presets or real plugins in Photoshop. The Franzis stuff is not a genuine plugin, does not really integrate beyond passing over. But for what it can do, it is relatively cheap but definitely not 1-click software.

XP-Man
Firstly can I quickly stress that I'm discussing, not arguing, so if I keep it brief please don't see that as me being argumentative.

I can put a strip of negatives on my light table and take c. 30MP images of each of them in about 5 seconds total (plus a bit more to check for dust beforehand). In Photoshop you then invert the ends of the curve tool to make them into positives and tweak it further to optimise it. It's very fast. You can quickly glance at the image and decide if it's worth further effort.

I find almost all my old film showed grain back when I used an 1800dpi scanner with it (which just gets so slow so quickly). The 5Dsr has 241 pixels/mm (which is what you get shooting 1:1 with a macro lens) although I usually shoot a little looser as that's way more than the source requires (and helps with the DoF). Bear in mind an 8x10 print at 240dpi is 4.6MP (7.2MP @ 300), so if I'm getting 4-6x that over the film image that's tons to spare for any likely use.

I should add that one popular way to scan film is the little boxes you can buy for about sixty quid that have a 14MP or so camera (they usually upscale to 22MP so that is the useful search term) and a light source plus software to handle film/negatives. The images are saved on an SD card. The quality isn't great but for someone wanting to do a few old films and not as fussy as we probably are they can be a good option. (You can even gets ones that take your phone as the camera.) This might be a good choice for the original questioner. Example:
https://www.7dayshop.com/products/7dayshop-high-resolution-22mp-35mm-slide-negative-film-scanner-with-16gb-sd-card-DS-123

JohnL
P.S. you need to cut and paste the link as the site doesn't like the toolbar you get when clicking on it.

NickH
Photoshop CS2 is now a free download.
Just google it.

NickH
The link to get the complete Adobe CS2 Suite of programs, directly from Adobe, is at:
https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-suite/kb/cs2-product-downloads.html

Other links found on Google may cause a redirect to Adobe's logon page, but the above link is valid nonetheless.

TK
The sur.ly is indeed active now, but you can close that with the [X] in the corner. For me, it does not re-direct to the Adobe logon page. Trying text selecting the link and copy it, to then paste it into a new browser tab if that helps. If your still getting the Adobe logon page, try clearing out your Adobe cookies.

Phineas T Barnum
I found Adobe offered a free download as a 30 day trailware of CS , not as freeware. Is this the "free download" you are speaking of ?

NickH Adobe ran a lock-down on CS2 distribution a long time back because the company never intended to release it free of charge to anyone. Good luck then with trying to stay on the CS2 download page and not being automatically re-directed to the Adobe ID log-in page. (Where, of course, if you are already a registered user of CS2, you can then re-download the suite.)

After some further use and a number of helpful comments have found how to undo.
In Expert mode when a filter on the left is chosen you can see its individual effects in the right-hand pane.
Each one can be turned on or off, each also has its controls in the pane beneath it offering fine control of that selection.
This gives the user a huge amount of control over the image and so am no longer disappointed but rather delighted.
Would be even more delighted if the interface was easier for these old eyes to see.

XP-Man
The choices in the left panel are really just examples of what can be achieved and giving you somewhere to start. They are actually just presets - i.e. collected settings for a subset of the 35 filters in the expert mode, so selecting one simply chooses some of those filters and adjusts their parameters. You can make up an infinite number of options.

For example you could select one of the choices on the left and change it to another simply by adjusting the expert settings. Some of the filters have an effectively endless number of choices (just look at the "stone" one).