This thread caught my interest as I've got a Sharp photocopier that is at the point where the technician is recommending that I consider replacing it as the next service will be extensive and expensive. It handles up to 11 x 17 paper, and I used to use it to print and photocopy scores as well as to enlarge 8.5 x 11 Finale parts to 9.5 x 12.5 on heavier paper. Now I use my HP 5100 printer to print directly on the 9.5 x 12.5 paper and thus have far less need for the photocopier.
I always assumed that large-format scanners would be prohibitively expensive and never really considered one, but I see Plustek has one on their site for something like $500-600. Now I'm thinking that I could use a large-format scanner for any such photocopying needs, and if I had to print out the resulting images on any weight or size of paper up to 11 x 17, the HP 5100 can handle it. This seems like it would be economical both in terms of space and cost (toner, maintenance, etc.). Has anyone who previously used a photocopier regularly gone this route and found it a good alternative? And while I'm at it, if there are any specific brands/models of large-format scanners folks can recommend I'd be grateful. Doug On Oct 24, 2010, at 11:24 AM, David W. Fenton wrote: > On 24 Oct 2010 at 11:07, Aryeh Har-Even wrote: > >> Greetings all - I've been following the thread about printers and was >> wondering what luck you guys have had with large format scanners, i.e. >> about 11 x 17 which won't break the bank. It's rather strange that >> going >> from legal to this size, most of the manafactuers increase the price >> exponentially. I recall that one of the under $400.00 multi printers I >> looked at (I believe it was the Brother MFC-6890CDW) did large scans. >> Any good? I'm looking to archive a couple of file boxes worth of music >> sketched or copied at around this size and only want to go through the >> exercise once. > > I client of mine is on their second Plustek, having recently bought a > second one about six months ago to replace an ailing one. They are > delighted with it, and so am I. It's a huge improvement over the > previous one (which they also loved), with better speed and vastly > improved software. There are also lots of thoughtful touches in the > design (not least of which, hinging the lid on the long side instead > of on the short side at the back). > > It's more expensive than you might want to spend at first glance, but > in my opinion, it's worth every penny for anybody who needs to > regularly scan large items (as does my client). > > As to multi-function devices, I simply can't recommend them. You're > usually sacrificing quality in all the component devices just to save > some space, and in many cases, they are being purchased principally > for one particular purpose (as printer), and that main purpose is > usually substandard. > > However, I would say that Brother has proven itself to be a pretty > good manufacturer in terms of price/features/quality in the last few > years, so if you're set on a multi-function device, that's about as > good as it gets in terms of return on investment. > > -- > David W. Fenton _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
