Can these be extracted?

54and56

Hi all,

Both my elderly parents passed away some time ago and I don't have a lot of decent photo's of myself with them. I found three souvenir photo viewers of my Mum, Dad and myself (aged about 8) from what must have been a family holiday and they (sadly) are by far the best head shots of them and myself as a kid that I've seen. When you look into the viewer towards any light source the photo appears vibrant and akin to "HD" in todays terms. Is it possible that the fact these photo's are encased in these viewers it has somehow preserved the quality?

This is the type of viewer I'm referring to:-



Is there any way these photo's could be extracted, high quality reproductions produced and perhaps the three of them put into some sort of collage without destroying the originals??

CabanSail

Inside that viewer will be a transparancy image. If you can access that then it can be scanned. I suspect it will be mounted just behind the translucent end.

Does it look like the white end will come off?

What is more important, the images or the complete viewer?

It may be possible to get access and retain both but it is likely that the original viewer may suffer damage.

54and56

CabanSail wrote: »

Inside that viewer will be a transparancy image. If you can access that then it can be scanned. I suspect it will be mounted just behind the translucent end.

Does it look like the white end will come off?

What is more important, the images or the complete viewer?

It may be possible to get access and retain both but it is likely that the original viewer may suffer damage.

Hi CabanSail,

Thanks for the info.

I'm not worried about keeping the viewers at all, my goal is to transfer the pictures contained in the viewers into large HD prints in a sort of collage.

Looking at my parents one by one through the viewer is amazing, it's like I'm looking at a huge HD projection. The quality is amazing compared to the fading photos in the old family albums.

magicbastarder

can you measure the end of the viewer? a standard photographic slide mount is a square, 50mm on a side, so if the white diffuse plastic on the end is in that ballpark - say 55 or 60mm - there's a damn good chance they just mounted the slide as normal and installed it in the viewer.

the fact that it's been in the viewer all these years has probably protected it from scratches, and from dust to a large extent.

54and56

magicbastarder wrote: »

can you measure the end of the viewer? a standard photographic slide mount is a square, 50mm on a side, so if the white diffuse plastic on the end is in that ballpark - say 55 or 60mm - there's a damn good chance they just mounted the slide as normal and installed it in the viewer.

Don't have access to the viewers right now but I'd say the white end of the viewer is no more than 2cm X 2cm.

CabanSail

I have never heard of transparancy film smaller than 35mm. I would hazard a guess they just cropped the appropriate size from the film, possibly using a camera that exposed two images per standard frame. If that is the case then there should be enough resolution for a reasonable quality image.

54and56

CabanSail wrote: »

I have never heard of transparancy film smaller than 35mm. I would hazard a guess they just cropped the appropriate size from the film, possibly using a camera that exposed two images per standard frame. If that is the case then there should be enough resolution for a reasonable quality image.

Just measured it there, the white end of the viewer is 25mm X 20mm.

magicbastarder

does it look like the end is glued or clipped on?
unfortunately, it sounds like that photograph is only ever going to be seen by people with physical access to the viewer unless you get it out and scanned.

54and56

magicbastarder wrote: »

does it look like the end is glued or clipped on?
unfortunately, it sounds like that photograph is only ever going to be seen by people with physical access to the viewer unless you get it out and scanned.

I'd say it's clipped in. I'll have a go later at easing it off and see how I get on.

peckerhead

CabanSail wrote: »

I have never heard of transparancy film smaller than 35mm.

I, unfortunately, am old enough to remember these! The smaller ones were all housed in the same size 2" x 2" frame as 35mm.

OP, when you finally do crack open that plastic housing, be extra careful not to damage the original. As has been pointed out, it'd been protected for a long time from dust/light/handling — but it may be very fragile at this stage. Get it scanned and backed up quickly; don't leave it lying around...

54and56

peckerhead wrote: »

I, unfortunately, am old enough to remember these! The smaller ones were all housed in the same size 2" x 2" frame as 35mm.

OP, when you finally do crack open that plastic housing, be extra careful not to damage the original. As has been pointed out, it'd been protected for a long time from dust/light/handling — but it may be very fragile at this stage. Get it scanned and backed up quickly; don't leave it lying around...

Thanks PH. Perhaps I should maintain the integrity of the viewer until I've identified someone who can extract it safely from the viewer, handle it properly and scan it in as high a resolution as possible.

Any suggestions for a service in Dublin who might do this?

magicbastarder

yeah, sounds like it could be half frame.

bullpost

Some more info here - including someone who captures these using smartphone:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/threads/question-about-old-photo-viewer-keychains-scopes-from-theme-parks.314303/

TomCo

If you get the negative out of the holder I'd be happy enough to scan it for you.
I have a negative scanner for 35mm film and slides.

54and56

bullpost wrote: »

Some more info here - including someone who captures these using smartphone:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/threads/question-about-old-photo-viewer-keychains-scopes-from-theme-parks.314303/

Wow, for play for finding that post from the depths of the interweb!!

So the final post in the thread is interesting:-

"I've had great success holding the viewer end of the scope directly up to the lens on the back of my smartphone (in the direction of light) and taking the picture. I use a galaxy s6 and just say cheese when I'm ready so that I don't have to move while I'm holding it steady. It captures the image perfectly and you can upload to your computer."

I might give that a go this evening. I can't see how the result would be anything close to a clear image capturing all the photo but it won't take much effort to find out and it won't do any damage to the viewer.

At the end of the day, if getting these images off the view is either going to potentially destroy the image (risk of tearing the slide, can't get adhesive off it etc) or be too expensive to get done I'll settle and be glad I can continue to have them in their original format. If they've lasted 40 years to date they'll likely last beyond my lifetime also.

CabanSail

I am amazed at all the various slide sizes. Never knew there were 110 slides before.

I would do the method of recording by smartphone first as that is non-destructive and you will have something. Then investigate if the cases can be unclipped and the transparency easily removed. I toothink it will be half frame 35mm and that the case was designed for the film to just slip in easily. If so then it should also come out the same way.