Discussion in 'Miscellaneous Equipment' started by Francesco, Jun 10, 2004.
Does anyone know of a good flatbed scanner that can take up to 12x20 prints? Many thanks in advance.
I asked Butch Welch how he does his 12x20 scans and he told me it was done by stitching in PS. Other than that I have no idea.
mrcallow should know, but I think you may be stuck with stitching unless you want to spend some serious cash. Just send me the prints, I will scan and stitch them together. Sorry, no return postage available
How about a two lights at 45% angles or open shade, tripod, and either a digital cam (good one) or a smaller format camera loaded with XP2. These are just for web presentation, right?
Si. My preference is to scan the print though as I am not really convinced that my neg scans are representative of my work.
My wife who owns a fine linens store is also interested (she has a webshop) hence the question - i.e. she has no patience except if the scanner can accept LARGE documents. Two birds with one stone.
There is a place here in Des Moines, Iowa that offers scanning for originals up to 42"x60". I know that won't help you where you are, but maybe there's something similar near you.
Big bucks indeed! Check this flatbed scanner out http://www.allied-images.com/image.htm. It fits the bill for 12x20 contacts but what a BILL! Nearly 10,000 british pounds! I think I will wait six months and see how fast that price tumbles (fingers crossed).
just buy a small 2 megapixel camera and use that, should be under $150. If all you need it for is web display then there isn't going to be any difference. The scanner will only give you a larger image to work from originally, but since you aren't going to be changing anything (a la the "What Analog means to me") then there isn't any point in having the larger file, unless you're going to be scanning and then digitally printing.
Would it not be better to have a flatbed scanner or are you saying that taking a picture of the print is as good as the scanner? In my experience this is not so but perhaps I am wrong. Let me rephrase the question: assuming all I will be doing in Photoshop is a resize of the scan it is your contention that a 150 dollar digital camera will be as true to my print as this high-end scanner and that the resulting image for web presentation will be identical qualitywise?
If properly exposed and lit, I'd put money on the fact that the average visitor to your site (photographers included) wouldn't be able to tell the two side by side. What size are you going to have them posted on your site? 800 pixels on the long side maybe? Think about what the end result is, and the fact that no two monitors display colors the same way. Wouldn't you rather spend your hard earned money on more film and chemicals, and a flatbed scanner anyway?
Absolutely! I await for the economics of high-tech to take hold.
Francesco, check out the stitched 12x20, it was not hard to do and the results are reasonably good for web publication. I would say save your money and buy a good flat bed scanner, but dont spend a bundle on it, buy film instead.
Regardless of price the scanner referenced above does not appear to have a TMA (Transparency Media Adaptor) to allow scans of negatives and other transparent materials. Or did I miss something?
I don't know of a scanner that has a scan area beyond 13x18. I have seen huge graphic arts scanners, but don't believe they are intended for continuos tone.
You might want to set up a copy area shot the prints with 4x5 and scan the 4x5 negs/tranies. If it is for the web this should be more than good enough.
Sorry, this is none too helpful.
Sandy, you are absolutely right, only contact PRINTS. This is not a bother (the price is) because I am interested in a scanner for 12x20 contact prints. I have a friend who lives in HK and he is going to check the same kind of scanner (i.e. A2 flatbed) and price - I would not be surprised if something similar is available in Asia.
Mrcallow, the link I attached in a previous page is for a very expensive flatbed scanner that can take as much as a 16x20 print I believe - even 20x24 I think. Pretty impressive but way too much money for simply putting prints up on my site and APUG easily and more faithfully. At least we know they are available and will no doubt tumble in price in the near future.
It wasn't my intention to suggest that they didn't exist -- I just haver never seen one. I was also under the impression that the Epson Xl was a tabloid (11x17) scanner.
MrCallow, until I find someone I know who has tried it or seen it I will assume that it does not exist. In fact, it is better that I forget about the whole thing until the price adjusts down to a few hundred bucks!
I have been scanning banquet camera prints from the 1940's (for website display) on my flat bed scanner with very good results. I scan them in 3 sections and then stitch them together.
For your 12x20's you might take a look at the Microtek 9800 series of scanners (B&H is a good place to look). With a Microtek 9800 (or equivalent) 2 scans should do it with plenty of overlap.
Separate names with a comma.