 |
 |
Which scanner would you buy?
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: London, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm looking to buy a new scanner, between $150-$300, for scanning prints, mainly for comping in Photoshop.
I want sharp, noise-free scans, and good detail and colour fidelity.
I've looked at the Linoscan 1200, which is pretty good, but I'd like something of similar quality, but not so expensive.
Thanks in advance,
 Jonny05
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's pretty hard to go wrong with any of the leading brands these days, but my impression is that Epson and Canon are the most Mac-oriented. That's just my impression, however - I haven't tested them personally (I have an Epson). They are also consistently praised in reviews.
Fortunately, you can get excellent 1200 dpi scanners for less than $150 now. Be sure to consider only optical resolution.
Another important spec is color bit output. Some companies advertise that they scan at 36 or 48 bits, but if you read the fine print, they only send 24 bits to the computer. 24 bits is probably plenty for amateur work, but 36 or 48 is better because it gives Photoshop more info to work with. I believe the Epson models are true 48-bit output scanners. Epsons are also generally the fastest on the market.
Obviously, I'm partial to Epson, but I would also check out the new Canons and HPs. Agfa and Microtek are also respected names.
The best reference I've seen for using scanners with Photoshop is "Real World Photoshop 6". Among other things, they recommend scanning at at least twice the resolution you need, then downscaling with PS. This helps remove any scanner noise.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status:
Offline
|
|
zigzag is right in that most any leading brand will do you right. that said, i had a hell of an experience with umax and would discourage anyone from going that route. i returned my umax and got an hp5370c. the scan quality is great but the software is so-so. it also scans transparencies and slides rather well. it cost me approx $299.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: London, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austria
Status:
Offline
|
|
Jonny05,
IŽd recommend Epson (the 1600 series) or Agfa.
You did not say which interface you intend to use. Both SCSI and FireWire (IEEE 1394) will do fine, but USB - I am not sure.
Regards,
Walter.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: nj, usa
Status:
Offline
|
|
I have a bus-powered USB Canon scanner. It works great. There is nothing wrong with hooking your scanner up to USB. It may be slower, but I don't really notice any slowness. It's not like you're going to lose framerates.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Bellevue, WA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I use the CanoScan N1220U for almost a year, it is very good on both the hardware and software (no conflict on Mac OS 9.2.1 at all). Today, I checked the Canon site and found out that they are going to release the newer 48-bit similar scanner, N1240U, in late August. I guess this slim, bus-powered scanner is good for normal usage.
Kenneth
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
