Scanners
10 messages in this thread
I am getting ready to purchase a scanner, to incorporate some photo mapping
into my 3DS, and of course, want to get the the sharpest
pictures I can. So, with the new scanners coming out, what is more important,
the color ability, 24 bit-30 bit, or the scan resolution,2400 x 2400, 4800 x
4800 and etc. Of course I can't find or afford the best of both , 30bit with
9600 x 9600 resolution, I can afford either 30 bit with 2400 x 2400 resolution,
one pass or a scanner that offers 24bit with 9600 x 9600 at three passes.
thanks
carl
Well maybe I made this question to hard for everybody. First I quess I should
have asked does anybody on this forum know what a "Scanner" is? And I don't
mean the people that can read/control your mind and make your head explode.
I can make it simplier, that new highly tech. device that is, most of the time,
square, with a hinged top to it, plugs into your parent's computer and when
you push the pretty button a bright light, that can blind you for a few seconds
when you put your face on the clean glass with your eyes wide open to see all
the cool stuff under the glass, comes on.
I can draw a picture of it in crayon for you too.
carl
Hi Carl,
What a lovley Name Carl…reminds one of an impatient child.<g>
Perhaps you could restate your question in the form of an anwer.
I've just stumbled upon this posting of your and can't understand it's obvious
anger.
It appears as if you may have asked a question to no one in particular and
therefore that's who responded.
If your question was about the purchase of a Scanner you may want to state your
exact needs.
For Example are you interested in OCR?
Will you be using this mostly for Grayscale or Color?
Is Speed a Factor?
What if you could get a great little scanner at a great Price but the
tech. support was just about nil' ?
If you happen to subscribe to the Computer Shopper they evauluate Scanners from
time to time and I remember them doing a pretty good evaluation on the most
popular
scanners available at the time about a couple months ago. However there was no
clear winner. It depended upon what it was you had planned to do with the
Scanner.
I realize this still doesn't answer your questions about scanners but I don't
have enough
information from you at this point to really help.
Could you please write down all your questions in "Orange" crayon only on the
back of
a Brown Paper Bag and post it on the open Jobs Board at the UpComing Siggraph.
Be sure and list your home address and phone number along with a Fax line.
8–^)
Murph'
Murph'- Thanks for the reply, I wasn't expressing a message in anger I was
expressing one in sarcasm and humour, maybe dry, but never the less humour.
I want to use the scanner to bring in color photo's, 33mm and etc., for
photoshop and 3d studio mapping. Speed is not a issue. And tech. support, who
needs it, it never is their when one needs it or it's to little to late.
Again for, sharpnest and focus, which would produce the better quality picture,
high resolution (9600 x 9600) or color depth (24bit, 30 bit and etc.).
Also I did not post the original message to anyone inpraticular because I did
not know who the resident scanner guru was suppose to be. Am I the first one
ever to post a message on this forum labeled "To All"? I'm honored.
Thanks again
Carl
Carl,
>> I want to use the scanner to bring in color photo's, 33mm and etc.,<<
I'm assuming you meant 35mm hard copy to be scanned in.
>>Again for, sharpnest and focus, which would produce the better quality
picture, high resolution (9600 x 9600) or color depth (24bit, 30 bit and etc.).
<<
When you say Sharpest Picture that can be rather subjective. The 9600 x 9600
is usually interpolated by the software which many of these Scanners claim to
do. However as it's tied to software your results will vary. The 24bit &
30bit is a little easier to pick out of their spec's.
I guess that it really all depends on where these scanned images are going that
is going to set your real standards. For example you can buy a $22,000.00 Drum
Scanner and it means nothing if all your going to do is use it for a bit map
decal on a soda bottle in your 3D Studio Scene.. Kind of like OverKill! <BG>
I've seen all the latest specs on the various scanners and it is difficult to
choose, however you mention that your interested in using these images for:
>> for photoshop and 3d studio mapping.<<
That leads me to beleive that you might be leaning towards the less expensive (
under $1K ) solutions.
What are you going to do with the image that goes in to PhotoShop?
If your going out to a $50,000 Dye-Sub or Fiery Printer you may want to spend
over $1k for the Scanner.
If your Going out to A Fargo Dye-Sub Printer for hard copy and touching up
the images for 3D Studio then what will you be going out to in 3D Studio?
If your just making .flc files it isn't going to matter much how cheap your
color scanner is because it's wasted on .flc files.
If your doing NTSC output then it's a different matter but you still don't
need to get too nuts with the Scanning side of it.
This all depends on what your doing with that image in 3D Studio when you go
out to NTSC "S-VHS" or "BroadCast".
Also if your going out to NTSC is it just to S-VHS our is it truely
"BroadCast".
D1 Quality demands a lot more that S-VHS.
>> Speed is not a issue.<<
That can save you some money.
I'd look at the new "Cold" Scanning Technoligies.
>> And tech. support, who needs it,<<
Everybody! <BG>
If you've got Driver Problems, and beleive me it's a distinct possibility with
Scanners, your going to need Tech. Support.
The Quick and Dirty way around many of those problems sometimes is as simple as
purchasing a copy of Corel SCSI Version 2 so your computer Can "See" The
Scanner.
However you still have to deal with the issue of Scanning Software.
PhotoShop is a big help here. This is supposing that the Scanner meets the
TWAIN Standards as well.
The Purchase of a Scanner can be very Subjective.
Many People wouldn't consider anything unless it had the Hewlett Packard Name
on it hence the HP ScanJet 3C at $949 would be their choice.
I've got One Client that Owns the Relisys 2412T at $799 and is very happy with
his choice.
Another Client uses the UMAX UC-1260 purchased with a Full Copy of PhotoShop
for $925 and absolutly Loves it.
They are all using 3D Studio and All going out to Video Tape. Sometimes at
Broadcast BetaSp and Sometimes at S-VHS.
The Best advice I could give you at this point is to look at those Scanners and
see if they fit your requirements. Since I've got Clients that own all 3 and
are all happy I'd suspect one of these will fill your needs.
Murph'
Murph'
Wow, thanks for the informative anserw, now I'm really confussed.
I already have photoshop, so being that as part of a deal is really not a
concern.
I seem to keep leaning toward the HP.
I have got to find someplace where I can see a varitey of scanners in use.
carl
Carl,
Humour aside….Re: Flatbed scanners – the HP Scanjet 3C is indeed qa
pretty decent sucker, very fast, lots of software, easy to setup, transparency
option & OCR document feeder available. Since your question mentioned 35mm
though, which is generally too small for good results with a flatbed (mounted
OR unmounted – tends to be fuzzy), forget it. Best results there would be to
either get a dedicated slide/filmstrip scanner, such as the Nikon CoolScan or
Polaroid SprintScan, or have scanned to PhotoCD by a service bureau (can be
done when film is developed, or more expensively after the fact). The PhotoCD
can then be cleaned up in Adobe Photoshop.
Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
Thanks for the reply Kevin- If I understand you right, are you saying that a
35mm, such as a 3" x 5" photo on matte paper, will not scan into photoshop very
well on a flatbed scanner. I could of sworn that in one of my photoshop
examples they said the file was of a acutual photograph scanned in.
Am I missing something here.
Carl
Carl – What Kevin was refering to was the scanning of a 35mm slide. The slide
scanning attachments for flatbeds yield so-so results. It's the usual case
where a tool that is dedicated to the task (i.e. a slide scanner) performs
better than one that is modified to the chore at hand.