New member - Scanning recommendations

[Simon R]

Hi folks,

new to forum and looking for some advice please.

Any graphite artists in the London (UK) area that can recommend a drum scanning company? Not having much fun with some companies not getting back to me. The paper I used was either Mellotex or Conqueror. Size of drawing is about A4 done on A3. I did get a scan done using a flatbed scanner but it turned out terrible - real grainy etc. Perhaps it pulled out too much detail? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks Simon

[Mike Sibley]

Any graphite artists in the London (UK) area that can recommend a drum scanning company?

I wish!!! The one I used in York for many years closed down, and I'm struggling to find another. There must be a pre-press house somewhere that has one - used by all the local commercial printers.

Just my opinion, but they can't be beaten for pin-sharp results.

I did get a scan done using a flatbed scanner, but it turned out terrible - real grainy etc. Perhaps it pulled out too much detail?

The only flatbed that I know of that pulls out too much detail is the cruse scanner. My, now retired, friend who ran Dace Digital complained that it picked up the paper texture and that made his life very difficult. No matter... as far as I know the only Cruse in the UK was in Manchester and that's since gone.

Just a warning: if you try using a domestic flatbed scanner you're heading for a disappointment. They use what is essentially a mobile/cell phone camera as a scanner. Drum scanners use a laser. Here are a couple of links that might help explain that:
Troubleshooting Fine Art Printing
The Best Scanners for Artwork
Getting Started with Printing

[Simon R]

Thanks for reply Mike.

The company I got the scan from is called 'Point 101'. They claim they use the latest Epson scanners. Another local company I've found by the name of 'Metro' can do drum scans for £40 + VAT for A3. Little expensive but that's London for you. Might just have to run with them. I'm only going to get a couple of prints done.

[Mike Sibley]

Another local company I've found by the name of 'Metro' can do drum scans for £40 + VAT for A3. Little expensive but that's London for you. Might just have to run with them. I'm only going to get a couple of prints done.

For a couple of prints it does seem expensive. But if you were thinking of releasing a limited edition print, it's peanuts. Just to take a few figures out of the air... assume a print run of 500 prints, plus 25 Artists Proofs (at twice the regular price). Let's say you retail at £50 and wholesale at £25, and that only 10% will be sold at retail, as well as all the APs. That's entirely feasible. That £40 pales into insignificance against the £17.500 gross turnover. But, in my opinion, that £48 (VAT included) will have provided the best scan you'll ever have or need.

And if you buy a £500 giclée printer and print in-house, with the paper and inks costing another £500... you'll still be £16,452 in profit.

That super drawing of yours, with its wide contrast range, really does need, and deserve, a truly excellent scan.

[Simon R]

This really is a personal drawing of a deerstalkers hut a friend and I built back in NZ. Sadly it no longer exists so just trying to keep the memories alive hence why I'm only going to get the two prints done. I was almost tempted to get it photographed but you have convinced me to definitely go for the scan. I guess at the end of the day it's not that much money for the time one puts into a drawing. Will keep you posted Cheers.

[Mike Sibley]

Simon PM'd me to ask:

Can you please tell me how many MB's on average your drum scans are? My drawing is a little smaller than A4, but the drum TIFF is only 52MB.

I took a quick look through my folder of raw scans and... it's not as straightforward as I thought it would be. The scans (all A3 in size) vary from about 30MB to almost 180. But I know why...

Let's take these two drum scans first - both of the same Pug drawing:

PUG
400 ppi TIFF
File size: 89.9 MB
Format: LAB/16
Profile: CIELAB D50

PUG
400 ppi TIFF
File size: 30.6 MB
Format: Grey/8
Profile: Greyscale D50

The second smaller file is a better, more usable scan, because it's as sharp and detailed as the larger file, and it has correct contrast (white balance was set to register the paper as white). Both are D50, which is greyscale (so, no stored colour data). Both are 400ppi resolution. BUT the first one is a 16-bit scan, and the second is an 8-bit. Hence, the difference in file size. I'll return to that.

I took another, the Old English Sheepdog, which is a big 179 MB TIFF file.

B17 OES.jpg

OES
600 ppi TIFF
File size: 179 MB
Format: RGBa/8
Profile: sRGB IEC61966-2.1

That is a resolution of 600 ppi rather than 400. And it's a full colour scan - not greyscale.

600ppi is probably overkill. In my experience, 300ppi (that's 'pixels per inch') is sufficient for a clean and sharp print. And, I believe, it's the commercial printing industry's standard resolution.

Greyscale is OK. There is no colour in graphite. Well, actually there is a faint brown tint from the clay, but you don't need that in the scan. On a domestic flat-bed scanner I always recommend scanning at 300ppi in COLOUR (RGB). Then you can reduce that to greyscale later. That's because RGB collects 32-bits of data per pixel. Greyscale collects 8-bits. So RGB can often capture more of the subtle detail, but once captured, you can remove the unnecessary colour data. A greyscale file is about 1/3rd the size of an RGB colour file.

Greyscale is a viable choice when using a laser drum scanner. And you don't need a 16-bit scan. 8-bit is perfectly OK.

So, I think the ideal is:
Image format: TIFF (it's lossless - if you copy/'save-as' you don't lose data)
300ppi resolution (minimum but OK)
8-bit greyscale scan
Paper set to be read as white (that's important!)

[Mike Sibley]

Simon R wrote:
The stats of my scan were:
Size 52.4 MB
Dimensions - 5650 x 3245
Resolution 610 dpi
Bit depth 24
Compression - Uncompressed
Colour representation - Uncalibrated RGB

I'm not an expert but... That looks like overkill to me.

52.4 MB is not huge, but it's RGB where 8-bit/D50 greyscale is all you need for a monochrome drawing. It won't miss any detail in the scan - it just won't record any colour data. 610ppi is more than you need too. 300ppi is the industry standard for commercial printing.

The scan, using the specs you give, is more than adequate. But if they have a "more expensive over 50MB" policy, I can't fail to suspect the specs were chosen to achieve that

Got to say this... sorry!

DPI vs PPI:
This is a personal dislike of mine - because there seems to be a growing bunch of folk who just use DPI for everything, even when it's not relevant

DPI = dots per inch.
DPI refers to inkjet printing. It has nothing to do with the resolution of the image.

PPI = pixels per inch.
PPI refers to the pixel count in a scan or photo image. 600ppi is twice as accurate as 300ppi - it has 600 pixels across each inch of the image. But, when you print it's unlikely you'll detect the difference between 600 and 300ppi. To put that into perspective, the monitor you're looking at right now is 72ppi (or possibly 96ppi if it's a Mac?)

It's OK... I've calmed down again

[Mike Sibley]

Where have all the drum laser scanners gone? The answer has to be that flatbed scanners have greatly increased in quality and have rendered laser scanners obsolete.

And that was recently discovered by an artist friend of mine, seeking advice. I'm obviously behind the times now...

So, you can probably ignore my preference for laser scanning and now be confident with flatbed. And I mentioned the loss of the Cruse flatbed scanner in Manchester... well, there are now at least two elsewhere. While I'm not personally recommending them, you can find two here:
Sally Mitchell
Cultural Heritage Digitisation

There are plenty of other non-Cruse scanners, such as:
Art Scan Studio

All the above are in the UK. I suggest you do your own online search for facilities in your area or country. But one thing I can assure you of you will not regret sourcing professional scans. No matter how good your artwork is, it will only reproduce as good as the quality of the scan.