Large Format Scanner Advice

I am thinking of buying a new, large format scanner. By large format, I mean the ability to scan (reflective) art that is up to 11 X 17.

For the last 5 years, I've been using a Umax Mirage IISE, with it's MagicScan software, and it's been great. But Magicscan is not updated for OS X, and I don't care for the results I get with either VueScan or Silverfast. Especially when compared to magicScan.

I'm an illustrator, so I won't be scanning negatives or film, only drawings and paintings.

I would be hooking up the new scanner to a 1.25 GHz dual G4, OS 10.2.8, 2 GB Ram, PSCS.

I am thinking of getting the Epson Expression 10000XL flatbed scanner, which costs about $3000 - $3500.

If anyone has any suggestions or experience with similar scanners, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Thanks
Zina

why...

why spend so much on a scanner?

e-bay.

Oh! I mis-typed! I meant $2000- $2500. Yikes.

Do you have any recommendations about which brand/model scanner you think is a good one for scanning 11 X 17 reflective art? I would gladly look on ebay, but I wondered if anyone had any recommendations for A3 flatbed scanners for scanning reflective art. Thanks in advance.

Just purchased an Epson 15000 for the purpose of saving us time stitching a3 technical drawings back together in PS....its capable, it's not ugly, its fast, its 600ppi optical but i havent put it through its paces beyond line art and even then as long as it can capture what I see i dont really care. Still it was £850 which equates to about $1700, but it may be a lot cheaper your side of the pool as a lot of things can be.

Thanks, progress. Most helpful.

I need to scan gouache paintings, in addition to graphite sketches for my work. Also sometimes 4 color pages from books I've illustrated. Sometimes I have even had to scan flattish objects.

The thoughts and feedback I get will be most helpful in making my decision. Also, I've googled for reviews of these kinds of scanners, but have not found much of anything.

Thanks again.

By the way, I just went and looked at the GT 15000, and it seems to only work with Windows. I only have Macs rights now.

All the scanners that I know of - that are any good - only work in OS 9 or classic.

Depending on your needs, you may also want to consider shooting your paintings and drawings with a digital camera. With a camera and good lighting you'll have the flexibility of shooting originals at a large variety of sizes. The quality and speed of a digital copy stand setup is great. A digital camera isn't a good option if you are looking for very high resolution scans of the originals. The Epson 10000 is fast, sharp and affordable.

Zina -

How large a file do you need from these paintings? Depending on your final output needs, you could also consider a medium-level digital camera to do your "scans". At the price level you are regarding, there is the new Nikon 12 Mp camera. Or for a bit less, there is the Canon 20D.

A well-calibrated camera in this range is capable of very accurate color renditions at file sizes of at least 11x17/300dpi.

Thanks for the suggestions.

I really do need to scan my stuff. I do pencil roughs for first-round sketches with publishers, and I need to scan those so they look as good as possible, since their comments and revisions will be based on what I send them. I scan at 300 ppi.

Sometimes begin an illustration in gouache, and then continue "painting" it on computer. And sometimes I have to paint pretty much all of it traditionally and scan it in to send to the client.

I really want to get a good scanner that can scan tabloid. As I say, I loved my Umax Mirage IIse, with magicScan, but it's antiquated. I'm thinking that scanners must have gotten better in the past 5 years. That's why I'm hoping someone here has some experience or insight into what's out there.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Also, I suppose I should add, in response to the suggestions about cameras, that I am not at all knowledgeable about photography. Although I often shoot models for my work, the photos are purely informational. I don't think the camera route would work for me, at least at this point. But thanks for the ideas.

I think you'd really like the Epson 10000XL.

Yes, that is a problem, no OSX support...and I think mike's right, theres a lack of it out there for decent scanners.

The 10000XL comes with software (Epson Scan) that runs in OS X 10.2.x and 10.3.x

Also of note is Vuescan scanner software that supports many older scanners that don't have OS X software.

The trouble is that neither VueScan nor SilverFast are worthy replacements for MagicScan.

UMAX has betrayed all those customers (like me), who only bought UMAX scanners because of the MagicScan software, by failing to develop an OSX version and they haven't even managed to offer a version that works in Classic.

Yes, I mentioned in my initial post that I'm not satisfied with Vuescan or Silverfast, when compared with MagicScan. MagicScan is the only reason I've kept limping along with an old beige G3 to run my scanner, but all my other machines are dual G4's and a G5.

I think I remember you, Ann, mentioning at some other time, that you like MagicScan, too, so I was particularly hoping you might have some thoughts about the new crop of tabloid sized scanners.

I'm wondering how the Epson Scan software stacks up against MagicScan. I'd love to hear from anyone who has tried them both.

I'm thinking I'll get the Epson 100000XL..but I'll keep an eye on this thread over the next few days, to see if anyone else has any advice.

Thanks.

do you have any specific area you'd like me to comment on the Epson scanner sw?

Thanks, Progress.

I don't know if you've ever used MagicScan, but one of the things I like about it, is that when scanning (in RGB, 300 ppi) a pencil rough, MagicScan picks up a lot of the subtle grays in the line work that VueScan and Silverfast miss, and I get a little "softer" scan than with Vuescan and Silverfast.

Also,I like to pick a white point in the scanner sw when scanning pencil roughs, and there's a much nicer "balance" in the resulting scan with MagicScan than in the other 2. (I'm sorry about my terminology... it's hard to describe these subtle visual differences.) The other 2 produce a "harsher", flatter looking scan... much of the texture and subtlety of the line is lost.

If you've ever noticed anything about these kinds of things with the Epson, in comparison to MagicScan, Vuescan or Silverfast, I'd be most grateful to hear your thoughts.

And thanks again.

ah, sadly not to that degree, althought the epson does have an adjustable histogram/levels dialogue so assuming it captures the same range this should be possible.

Cant get a demo or sale or return job?

Thanks, progress. No luck with demo.

Epson Scan Twain plug-in with OSX, I've been using that with good results.

Hi there

I note your post on the Epson GT15000 - I was thinking of buying one. Ideally I would like to scan A3 pages to pdf - does this scanner's software interface well with Adobe Acrobat,is it fast and what sizes are the scanned files?

many thanks

Gerard Murphy

Zina:

Was that SilverFast SE (as supplied through UMAX) or the full-blown SilverFast Ai?

There is a huge difference in performance.

(Frankly, SF SE is useless — and I feel the same about VueScan too.)

Zina,

Here's a suggestion regarding your experiences with Vuscan vs MagicScan. This is advice I read on this forum quite a long time ago.

If you use Vuescan in 16 bit mode, with all imaging controls set as NOT affecting the scan data (sharpening, highlight, shadows, gamma), you will capture a file that has everything your scanner is capable of giving you.

Then, you can open that 16 bit file in Photoshop and adjust the image (in 16 bit mode) to resemble the results you were getting in MagicScan.

I've never used magicScan, but the results you were getting were due to whatever "default" image manipulation process it was applying to the the raw scan data it was capturing. That may have included tone adjustments and sharpening, or other adjustments. I don't know.

When you use Vue scan to get you the raw data, you then have the very same scanner data that MagicScan was applying it's "magic" to. That data is the scanner sensor's true output. Photoshop can do whatever MagicScan did to that image data. And of course it can do much, much more.

When you look at the file's histogram in Photoshop, it will have (lots of ) space between the shadow portion of the data and the left side of the graph and between the highlights and the right side of the graph. Once you set the shadow and highlight sliders to their respective "ends" of the histogram, the scan should look pretty decent. You can then go ahead and do whatever sharpening you need (it will probably be slight), other tone changes or edits (using Curves) as you need, and you should be able to get as good a scan as you ever got before.

Then convert to 8 bits and you're done. After a few scans, using Photoshop as your "scanning software" like this becomes very easy.

I tried this workflow rather than use Nikon software with a very old Nikon slide scanner. Vuescan and the above advice gave that old scanner a new lease on life!

Sissy

And NikonScan4 (IF you know how to use it to the full!) would do even better for you!

IMHO — and experience.

:-)

[ And I used MagicScan extensively for about ten years so I understand exactly what Zina is talking about. ]

Well, it's interesting to see this thread revived!

I wound up buying the graphics version (without transparency adapter) of the Epson 10000XL. I'm happy with it, it does all I need (which is to scan in sketches and paintings and such), and it's way quieter and faster than the Umax Mirage IIse that I'd had for years. Both scanners were large (11 X 17) format.

About the scanning software: Yes, Ann, I did use the grown-up version of Silverfast, and I just wasn't able to achieve the slightly soft/subtle character of my pencil line with it. I'm not saying it's impossible, just that I couldn't find a way to do it. Thanks for the observation, though, I believe its true that the difference between the two versions is significant.

And, thanks, too, to you, Sissy. The thing I liked so well about MagicScan was that I could choose my white point, and tinker a bit with the histogram, and the resulting scan captured a really nice range of color and quality of the line. I haven't found that to be the case with Vuescan. But when I come up for air from these excruciating deadlines this month, I will check out your method.

But, as I said, I'm quite happy with the Epson, it does all I need. Not as good as MagicScan, but life goes on.

Thanks for the comments.

Oh! And Gerald, I don't know anyhting about the 15000, sorry!