Using sheetfed scanner to scan photo prints and postcards

Question

I inherited thousands of photographs (negatives + prints) and postcards. My plan is to select from each film the photos I want to keep and feed them to a sheetfed scanner. This prevents me from using the negatives as I don't want to first select the photos and send search and mark the corresponding negatives. Of course I read all the comments encouraging to use a send-in-service, but I would like to tune parameters like noise reduction, color vibrance and contrast myself.

I do not need raw output, but the scanner should perform color and contrast enhancements before converting it to jpg.

Did you try similar? Which scanner could you recommend? Did I overlook something?

• The owner of vuescan recommends the following sheetfed scanners, which supposedly also work for photos: Epson GT-S50, GT-S80, GT-1500

• Here at What's the best way to scan in hundreds of pictures? the Canon DR 2010C was recommended for a similar task.

• There is also the 'original' sheetfed scanner [Fujitsu ScanSnap][7].

Answer 1

It might be possible to get more detailed files (TIFF or RAW) from a send-in service. I'm in the same dilemma as you, but can't find a good ADF scanner that takes a variety of photo thicknesses. For what it's worth, many auto scanners will require the photo to bend slightly, and if your photos have a bit of dogear they may get jammed.

I'm considering sending them in, mainly due to the laborious nature of the task. Consumer-grade scanners won't get the same results as professional scanners or people who do it as a job.

Answer 2

I've done print and postcard bulk scanning with a Fujitsu ScanSnap iX500. Depending on color pallette results varies from very good to garish. This is a document scanner, not a photo scanner.

The speed and convenience was impressive however. Most of the old prints weren't that great to begin with. Once they are filed in Aperture I'll selectively image negatives or prints. (Negative imaging is much more troublesome than one things - largely because of dust.)