Scanner recommendation

[Thomas Brandt]

I need a flatbed scanner for graphic arts, occasional photos, occasional
documents, some copying. I'd like it to be legal size and have an ADF
that can handle at least 25 pages. I'd like a "copy" button which
automatically scans and sends the results to my default printer. It must
be minimum 1200 ppi optical resolution, I'd be happier with 2400. I'm
using Windows XP, and I have a Firewire port, but I could tolerate with USB.

Anyone feel like making a recommendation?

Thanks
Thomas

 

[CSM1]

I need a flatbed scanner for graphic arts, occasional photos, occasional
documents, some copying. I'd like it to be legal size and have an ADF that
can handle at least 25 pages. I'd like a "copy" button which automatically
scans and sends the results to my default printer. It must be minimum 1200
ppi optical resolution, I'd be happier with 2400. I'm using Windows XP, and
I have a Firewire port, but I could tolerate with USB.

Anyone feel like making a recommendation?

Thanks
Thomas

Canon
600 DPI, 35 docs, legal size in document feeder.
http://www.usa.canon.com/opd/controller?act=OPDModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=2204&modelid=13057

Brochure:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cpr/pdf/Brochures/scan_high_speed_doc_scanner_full_line_bro_072208.pdf

 

[Thomas Brandt]

Canon
600 DPI, 35 docs, legal size in document feeder.
http://www.usa.canon.com/opd/controller?act=OPDModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=2204&modelid=13057

This is only 600 dpi. I need minimum 1200, 2400 preferred. Sometimes I
have to scan letter-size pages for printing as B&W bitmaps. These don't
look good at 600 dpi.

Any other recommendations?

Thomas

 

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

This is only 600 dpi. I need minimum 1200, 2400 preferred. Sometimes I
have to scan letter-size pages for printing as B&W bitmaps. These don't
look good at 600 dpi.

Any other recommendations?

Thomas

Your requirements are inconsistant with reality.

You can't get better than 600 ppi resolution on paper documents with
any scanner, no matter what the states resolution is. If you really
need 1200 PPI resolution (for scanning stamps, engravings, etchings,
etc) then get two scanners, one high resolution flatbed and another
with a document feeder.

 

[Barry Watzman]

I am going to make a suggestion to you that may seem bizarre, but I
assure that this is good advice.

Go on E-Bay and pick up an HP 5490C (or, equivalently, a 5470C with the
C9866A ADF accessory (it's the same exact thing)). If you are lucky,
you might get it for as little as $10, but even worst case it will be
relatively cheap. Be sure that you get the proper power supply (which
is different between ADF and non-ADF models) and the ADF paper input
tray, these are often missing from used units and are not easily
replaced. Also, a complete unit will come with an XPA accessory for
scanning film slides and negatives (I don't recommend that you use this
.... it does work, but this scanner does not do a good job scanning film).

This scanner was HP's $500 "top of the line", PC Magazine's "Editor's
Choice" model .... from about 2000 or 2001. But it's 2,400 DPI HARDWARE
resolution, it is a superb scanner for both documents and images, and
the software that HP offered back then (HP Precision Scan Pro) was truly
professional and is FAR better than what they or most other firms offer
today. The scanner works with XP and, contrary to what HP says, it
actually can be installed with Vista as well (the installation is a bit
tricky and requires using "compatability mode", but once installed it
actually works well and properly).

The HP software package includes a copy utility. The scanner has 5
buttons on the front for automatically scanning and sending the output
to different destinations (one of them IS a direct to printer copy
function) but I've never used the buttons although I have used the copy
software utility. From your description, this will give you everything
you want, great quality (better than any more recent HP product, in my
opinion (due to the fact that HP's scanning software has turned to
crap), and on top of that it's a CHEAP solution.

 

[Barry Watzman]

The HP scanner that I recommended (the 5470/5490) actually has two
different CCD sensors in the same scanner. One is used at lower
resolutions, the other is used at higher resolutions (I think that the
dividing line as to which sensor is used is 600 dpi, but it may be 300 dpi).

 

[Thomas Brandt]

You can't get better than 600 ppi resolution on paper documents with
any scanner, no matter what the states resolution is.

Please explain this. I've been scanning paper documents from a variety
of sources for years, and I can see a difference between 600 and 1200
ppi after the scan is printed at 100% on my 1200 dpi B&W laser printer.

In particular, I sometimes have to scan printed book pages as B&W
bitmaps (not grayscales). Small type (9 or 10 pt) looks like sh*t at 600
ppi. The thin parts of the letterforms get thinner, the thick parts get
thicker. Curves have a scratchy look. This improves considerably at
1200. I've always assumed that was because I'm using a 1200 ppi scanner.

BTW, I have an old Agfa Duoscan T1200 right now that I have been
reasonably satisfied with. I used to have an all-in-one
fax/copier/scanner/printer that got fried in a lightning storm last
summer. The Agfa connects via SCSI, and I don't have a SCSI board in my
new computer. As well, I don't think there's an XP driver for it (I
bought it when I had a computer with Win98; I managed to find a hacked
driver when I upgraded to W2K). So instead of replacing both scanner and
AIO, I want to just get a scanner with an ADF and a Copy/Print button,
so I can use it as a copier.

Thomas

 

[CSM1]

Please explain this. I've been scanning paper documents from a variety of
sources for years, and I can see a difference between 600 and 1200 ppi
after the scan is printed at 100% on my 1200 dpi B&W laser printer.

In particular, I sometimes have to scan printed book pages as B&W bitmaps
(not grayscales). Small type (9 or 10 pt) looks like sh*t at 600 ppi. The
thin parts of the letterforms get thinner, the thick parts get thicker.
Curves have a scratchy look. This improves considerably at 1200. I've
always assumed that was because I'm using a 1200 ppi scanner.

BTW, I have an old Agfa Duoscan T1200 right now that I have been
reasonably satisfied with. I used to have an all-in-one
fax/copier/scanner/printer that got fried in a lightning storm last
summer. The Agfa connects via SCSI, and I don't have a SCSI board in my
new computer. As well, I don't think there's an XP driver for it (I bought
it when I had a computer with Win98; I managed to find a hacked driver
when I upgraded to W2K). So instead of replacing both scanner and AIO, I
want to just get a scanner with an ADF and a Copy/Print button, so I can
use it as a copier.

Thomas

You are talking about scaling.
If you want to print an image on the printer at a different size on the
paper.
http://www.scantips.com/basics2c.html

Printer Resolution
http://www.scantips.com/basics03.html

I want to print the image BIG
http://www.scantips.com/basics3c.html

Just about anything you want to know about scanning.
A few scanning tips
http://www.scantips.com/

 

[Thomas Brandt]

You are talking about scaling.

No, I'm really not. I'm talking about the visible difference between the
printed output of a 600 ppi bitmap and a 1200 ppi bitmap. I didn't say
anything about scaling, and just to be clear I made sure I said "100%"
in my last post. No scaling.

Can anyone support Charlie's assertion that 1200 ppi scanners don't
really scan at 1200 ppi?

Thomas

 

[Thomas Brandt]

I found a few on E-Bay, the cheapest for $105, minus some cables. I'm
not sure that's cheap enough for me to buy a used scanner. I'd rather
pay a few hundred more and get a new one.

Nobody's making anything decent these days?

Thomas

 

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

No, I'm really not. I'm talking about the visible difference between the
printed output of a 600 ppi bitmap and a 1200 ppi bitmap. I didn't say
anything about scaling, and just to be clear I made sure I said "100%"
in my last post. No scaling.

Can anyone support Charlie's assertion that 1200 ppi scanners don't
really scan at 1200 ppi?

Thomas

That's NOT what I said. I said you can't do better than a 600 ppi scan
of printed documents. You can certainly do better by scanning actual
objects (stamps, engravings, etc) at higher resolution. This assertion
is based on the fact that a printed document "contains" no more than
about 300 ppi of information. ( (Scanning at 600 ppi just allows for
those few that do contain more than 300 ppi of information)
Certainly high resolution scanners will scan at higher resolutions.
Basically, you pay for what you get.

 

[Thomas Brandt]

This assertion
is based on the fact that a printed document "contains" no more than
about 300 ppi of information.

Okay. Can you back that up then? Offset printing doesn't really
"contain" any dots. It contains blobs of ink that sit on the paper with
nice rounded curves in the shapes of letters. Most (but not all) of the
books I've had to scan were probably printed offset. Paper quality
(grain, absorption) affects type quality, but every book I've scanned
looked far better than if I had typeset the type and printed it at 300 dpi.

I can see dots at 300 dpi. I can see the difference between 600 and 1200
dpi. I can't see any dots in printed books.

Thomas

 

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

Okay. Can you back that up then? Offset printing doesn't really
"contain" any dots. It contains blobs of ink that sit on the paper with
nice rounded curves in the shapes of letters. Most (but not all) of the
books I've had to scan were probably printed offset. Paper quality
(grain, absorption) affects type quality, but every book I've scanned
looked far better than if I had typeset the type and printed it at 300 dpi.

I can see dots at 300 dpi. I can see the difference between 600 and 1200
dpi. I can't see any dots in printed books.

Thomas

www.scantips.com

 

[Thomas Brandt]

www.scantips.com

I don't see anything there to support your assertion. Maybe you could be
more specific?

Thomas

 

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

I don't see anything there to support your assertion. Maybe you could be
more specific?

Thomas

No...

You asked for advice and recommendations. I gave it. If you don't have
the time to research it, and don't accept my recommendation, OK. I
don't really mind.

 

[Thomas Brandt]

You asked for advice and recommendations. I gave it. If you don't have
the time to research it, and don't accept my recommendation, OK. I
don't really mind.

I didn't say I don't have time. I went through every relevant link on
that site, and I didn't see anything there that says anything like
"printed documents 'contain' no more than 300 ppi of information".

Really, I just want to understand what you've said.

Thomas

 

[Barry Watzman]

The assertion is not supportable.

But it should be noted that a lot depends on the source of the original
document.

On an inkjet printer, you have liquid ink hitting porous paper and
spreading through the paper in the time before it dries. The paper and
the ink create a real limitation in the achievable quality.

In a laser printer, you can actually get MUCH finer detail and quality.

And, finally, consider the printing quality of, say, currency (or should
I say the "engraving quality").

All very different.

 

[Thomas Brandt]

The assertion is not supportable.

But it should be noted that a lot depends on the source of the original
document.

Of course. The scan can't be better than the source.

But for me, if I have to scan it, it's usually because it's already been
commercially printed, which means offset, usually on fairly good quality
paper, not inkjet or laser.

Sometimes the source is pretty good, sometimes not so good. I need a
scanner that will give me:

a) Decent quality scans of photos
b) Hi res scans of B&W line art (minimum 1200 ppi)
c) Easy copying (hence the ADF).

I've looked carefully at a number of scanners that have "copy" buttons
(e.g., the Epson Perfection 4490 Office Scanner, HP Scanjet 7650) and
I'm coming to the conclusion that true one-touch copying is not a
reality. What I'm seeing is that the copy button is really just a
shortcut to a program on the computer that offers sizing, number of
copies, darkness, etc., along with the real copy button. I think a
scanner is not going to do what I want. I think I need a copy machine or
an AIO.

So at this point I'm thinking maybe I'll just get an ADF for my aging
Agfa Duoscan T1200 and copy via software.

Thomas

 

[CSM1]

I didn't say I don't have time. I went through every relevant link on that
site, and I didn't see anything there that says anything like "printed
documents 'contain' no more than 300 ppi of information".

Really, I just want to understand what you've said.

Thomas

If your are looking for the statement that prints only hold about 300 DPI
resolution,
you will find that statement in the second paragraph on this page.
http://www.scantips.com/basics08.html

Here is another source of the same information.
http://www.digitalmemoriesonline.net/scan/scan_processing/prints_vs_film_scanning.htm

 

[Thomas Brandt]

If your are looking for the statement that prints only hold about 300 DPI
resolution,
you will find that statement in the second paragraph on this page.
http://www.scantips.com/basics08.html

Here is another source of the same information.
http://www.digitalmemoriesonline.net/scan/scan_processing/prints_vs_film_scanning.htm

Thanks, CSM1, but both these links speak to color photos. I need a 1200
ppi scanner for line art, B&W bitmaps.

Charlie says

------------
You can't get better than 600 ppi resolution on paper documents with
any scanner, no matter what the states resolution is.
------------

He also says

------------
This assertion
is based on the fact that a printed document "contains" no more than
about 300 ppi of information.
------------

I don't believe this is true. I believe line art should be scanned at
1200 ppi minimum for 100% reproduction. Color and grayscale should,
quite appropriately, be scanned at 300 ppi for 100% reproduction.

Thomas