jn asked:
I would like to get a $350-$450 scanner to make
scans
of slides to produce 8x10 prints on either an Epson
870 or Canon S800 inkjet printer.
Colin Maddock answered:
How about the Canon FS2710? Probably in your price
range.
I had assumed that the FS2710 was too expensive, but
you're
Unfortunately there is one point which you don't mention - CMYK is defined
as the color space or gamut of *printable* colors. In theory you could
perhaps have more colors using C, M and Y with the addition of K but today's
inks can't print all those colors and in fact can't print all the colors
-Original Message-
From: Phil [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 7:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Fast, decent, low res scans
Thank you for the replies on the how do I make fast, decent low res
scans
question I posted
jn asked:
I would like to get a $350-$450 scanner to make scans
of slides to produce 8x10 prints on either an Epson
870 or Canon S800 inkjet printer.
How about the Canon FS2710? Probably in your price range.
Colin Maddock
jn
I have the Canonscan too and am very pleased with it,
Hi guys -this is a message for anyone in the UK who is wiling to do me a
favour . I am presently using a flatbed to scan printsmainly to send to
websites and would like to invest in a slidescanner so I can use slide film
instead and get the best of both worlds but dont want to jump in with
jn wrote:
I had assumed that the FS2710 was too expensive, but
you're right, I guess it's now selling for around $400
in the US. Does this scanner benefit from Vuescan,
too, with regards to noise reduction, shadow detail,
or other improvements in image quality?
I'm afraid almost all my
Stuart,
we have a Canon 2700FS here at the University of Aberdeen if
you're interested. This will give you 2720 dpi at full resolution
which I can email straight to you.
Regards Chris McBrien (Engineering Dept.)
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Larry wrote:
The only way you might experience the differences you are referring to is
if you are scanning to a jpeg output which creates an imprecise workflow and
inconsistent results.
That's exactly what I did (it's the way HP Precision Scan works), and it
explains what I'm seeing. I bow to
My current project is to take a large collection of multi-format negatives
and transparencies (35mm to 4x5), bw color prints (billfold to 8x10) to
scan them into JPEG for insertion into PowerPoint 2000 slides for full
frame projection via DLP (Digital Light Processing) at 600x800 pixels.
I
I would think that a digital camera with Macro and Zoom capabilities on a
copy stand would do a great job on the flat copy. Obviously lighting would
have to be balanced for color and glare to get the best results.
One of the cameras with an LCD viewfinder that rotates off the lens axis
like the
At 11:19 28/05/01 -0400, you wrote:
I would think that a digital camera with Macro and Zoom capabilities on a
copy stand would do a great job on the flat copy. Obviously lighting would
have to be balanced for color and glare to get the best results.
One of the cameras with an LCD viewfinder that
--- Colin Maddock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm afraid almost all my experience using the FS2710
is with negs, and you look to be asking about
slides. Someone else may come in here with that
information. Shadow detail is always difficult. Have
you compared scanners for this aspect in Tony
why didntr I think of that, this lurker now has a solution, thanks
on 5/28/01 10:00 AM, Alan Eckert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Silverfast Ai 5.0 came bundled with my Sprintscan 4000 and, while it seems to
be very capable scanning software, it has one highly annoying trait. It
presents the registration box every time I invoke it, and I must laboriously
It absolutely works well with Vuescan. In fact, I rarely used the Canon
scanning software with it, the performance under Vuescan being so good.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: j n [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had assumed that the FS2710 was too expensive, but
you're right, I guess it's now
I would think that a digital camera with Macro and Zoom capabilities on a
copy stand would do a great job on the flat copy. Obviously lighting would
have to be balanced for color and glare to get the best results.
With traditional film based copy set-up, one can use polarizing filtration
(single
Good point, I had forgot that. And this is in essence why in a given
configuration, the CMYK space is more compressed than RGB.
- Original Message -
From: Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 11:48 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: which
I just released VueScan 7.0.24 for Windows, Linux and Mac OS 8/9/X.
It can be downloaded from:
http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
What's new in version 7.0.24
* Improved support for 14-bit UMAX scanners
* Added support for varying CCD exposure time when using
transparency adapter on HP
on 5/28/01 4:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ed, this came up on the Digital Silver mailing list but I'd been wondering
myself what happened to the 'output raw file' checkbox in the mac
version. It ain't there anymore! Not in 7.0.24, or 23, or 7.0.6 either. How
do we
19 matches
Mail list logo
