Bruce, You are correct, I happened to visit Future Shop an hour ago and was looking at Epson, HP and Lexmark scanners and a number of them were USB/Parallel Port transparency/photo scanners.
The HP ScanJet 3570C (USB)(35mm) was on sale @ $229.99, Epson Perfection 1660 (USB)(35mm/MF) @ $289.99. They also had a special on the HP ScanJet 4470 USB/Par (Open Box) @ $119.96. Are these any good? Considering I will mostly scan my negs or slides initially highest res possible, and PhotoShop them for the web. James ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 9:23 AM Subject: Re[3]: Quality film scanner at an acceptable price? > Ken, > > You must be confused. The scanners in question (Epson 2450 & > replacement) actually scan film. They have a built in light source in > the lid and holders for the negatives/chromes. The drivers and > scanning software deal with what type of source material you are using > (paper, negative, transparency). The nice thing about them is they > can scan up to a 4X5 piece of film. They don't have the resolution or > dmax of a nikon 8000, but they don't have a price tag of that either. > The only choice for MF shooters is this at about 200-300 USD or a film > scanner at about 2000-3000 USD. That is 10 times the price. I have > tried two units. The first I was not satisfied with it's sharpness. I > returned it. Later, reading on the web indicated that some of the > earlier units had a QC issue where the focus point was not consistent > and you could get less sharp scans (that's what I found). They seemed > to have fixed that, so I ordered another and have been happy with it. > > My suggestion to Paal is to buy one from a place that he can return > it, if he finds that it doesn't meet his needs. The alternative is > very expensive. > > HTH, > > > Bruce > > > > Friday, October 25, 2002, 6:13:45 AM, you wrote: > > KW> I'm told the best quality scan is achieved with a film scanner. Scanning a > KW> print will not produce an equal quality scan, all other things being equal. > KW> Not good news if your trying to obtain optimum scan quality for medium > KW> format images on a limited budget. I've used a N**** Cool Scan 4000 ED film > KW> & slide scanner and am very happy with the output, but this is a 35mm format > KW> scanner. The N**** Super Coolscan 8000 is a medium format film scanner but > KW> its cost is significantly higher than the 4000. > > KW> Ken Waller > > KW> ----- Original Message ----- > KW> From: Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > KW> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > KW> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:06 PM > KW> Subject: Re: Re: Quality film scanner at an acceptable price? > > > >> Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >Thanks for the replies so far. I've settled on an Epson 2100. With this > >> printer, if the advertising is to be believed, I can start producing and > >> perhaps selling home made, gallery quality fine prints. However, this > KW> leads > >> to another question. Will a scanner like the new Epson GT-9800F produce > >> scans good enough to take advantage of the 2100 printer? Or do I need a > >> dedicated film scanner? > >> > >> P�l< > >> > >> unless you shoot medium format, that scanner will be barely adequate at > >> best. > >> > >> Herb.... > >> > >> >
