Thinking of a scanner
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Iphoto 08 to iPhoto 09
Next: Apple Tech Support?
From: Martin S Taylor on 22 Feb 2010 12:44 Rowland McDonnell wrote >> Hmm. I get that when I hit 'Overview'. I then have to select an area (click >> and drag) and the 'Scan' button ungreys and allows me to do a decent quality >> scan. > > No such button as `Overview'. I've got `Scan' and `Show Details' > buttons only. Do you have a checkbox for 'Detect separate items'? > `Scan' gives me a fast scan and dumps the file in ~/Pictures (selectable > via a pop-up menu). Yes, it will. > Pressing `Overview' - ah well now, that's not a bad idea, is it? Yes. > Some controls. Typo here? Did you mean pressing 'Show Details'? > Nothing but crude manual colour correction available - can't even do > anything with ColorSync. Bummer. > > Or is it possible to set up ColorSync elsewhere so that it's used to do > the scan? I've read the ColorSync help, and Apple's line *still* seems > to be `You don't need to know about it, it just works'... Any idea how > to set up anything to do with ColorSync? > > (he asked, plaintively. It's like this: ever since I heard about > ColorSync, I've wanted to make use of it. And I've had a colour printer > or three, and I've got a colour scanner, but can I work out how to set > up colorsync profiles to put colorsync to work sorting out my colour? > Nope.) No. I've always scanned using a scanner, then done any necessary colour adjustment using colour adjustment software. <snip> >> I'd recommend buying a Canon scanner (or an all-in-one) from a mail order >> company and trying it out. If it doesn't work (or even if it does) you can >> always return it for a full refund under the Distance Selling Regulations. > > Hmm - righto. Ta for the thought. > btw, is there any chance that an HP scanner might be competent? The > prices look quite good, but I've never met an HP scanner in the past > that struck me as capable of producing adequate images... I hate HP peripherals. They write their own software all over the place, and put icons to all of it in the dock. Vt has an HP, and it was one of the reasons I bought a Canon. Hope this helps. MST
From: D.M. Procida on 22 Feb 2010 13:02 Martin S Taylor <mst(a)hRyEpMnOoVtEiTsHm.cIo.uSk> wrote: > J. J. Lodder wrote > >> I've STFW and it's bewildering - anyone got any suggestions on a scanner > >> with half-decent scanning software included, 4800 dpi (ish), and a USB 2 > >> and/or FW/FW800 interface? All to connect to an Intel Core2Duo Mac > >> running 10.6.2 (and above, as and when it arrives)? > > > > Any scanner will scan to Graphic Converter, assuming you have that, > > which is more than half-competent, > > Image Capture is fine, if your scanner is TWAIN compatible and you're running > 10.6 Image Capture with my scanner doesn't seem to have all the options - for controlling the scanner - that the Canon software does. The Canon software is truly horrible to use, but at least it can do things usefully, like save each negative as a separate file. Daniele
From: Woody on 22 Feb 2010 13:17 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > ... which is 100% fully commercial proprietary copyrighted software, and > > the only software that supports exactly the data structures that > > Aperture (e.g.) works with is Aperture. > > Its a series of folders named 2002,2003,2004 etc, and within that there > are a series of months that go 01->12, and within that there are a > series of days, depending on what days you took photos, in the range of > 1->31 > > > That is the lock-in I'm talking about, which is in fact there. > > That isn't a lock in, that is an ordering. > A lock in is where there is no way of getting your data out (or it is > hard). And now I actually look, there is also a large XML file that indicates which files are in which album, so there is no metadata lost if you lost the application. -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: J. J. Lodder on 22 Feb 2010 14:42 D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > Martin S Taylor <mst(a)hRyEpMnOoVtEiTsHm.cIo.uSk> wrote: > > > J. J. Lodder wrote > > >> I've STFW and it's bewildering - anyone got any suggestions on a scanner > > >> with half-decent scanning software included, 4800 dpi (ish), and a USB 2 > > >> and/or FW/FW800 interface? All to connect to an Intel Core2Duo Mac > > >> running 10.6.2 (and above, as and when it arrives)? > > > > > > Any scanner will scan to Graphic Converter, assuming you have that, > > > which is more than half-competent, > > > > Image Capture is fine, if your scanner is TWAIN compatible and you're > > running 10.6 > > Image Capture with my scanner doesn't seem to have all the options - for > controlling the scanner - that the Canon software does. > > The Canon software is truly horrible to use, but at least it can do > things usefully, like save each negative as a separate file. That's what the reviews say: a great scanner, hampered by awful software. It's a miserable Windows port, and I suspect it's mediocre under Windows too, Jan
From: J. J. Lodder on 22 Feb 2010 14:42
Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote: > [snip] > > > > > > >It's a little pricier than the basic scanners, but does two strips > > > > > >of negatives, and hardware digital cleaning > > > > > > > > > > What does that mean? > > > > > > > > When scanning negatives, you often see particles of dust, scratches etc. > > > > on the image. The Epson 4490 has what's called 'Digital ICE', which is a > > > > system for cleaning up the images before it saves to the file. Saves a > > > > destructive image edit, and post-processing work. > > > > > > Hmmm - i.e., gives you a destructive edit before the data's even left > > > the scanner, or so it seems. > > > > You want an option to edit the raw sensor data, by hand? > > (bypassing the no doubt destructive processing in the scanner?) > > As you know very well, that's a different issue. > > The scanner has to process the raw sensor data to give the best > measurement it can of the image. But adjusting raw data to give > calibrated data (which is what that process involves) is quite different > to software deciding to replace datum A with datum B, because it's > guessing that's `noise removal'. It will do noise removal (and sharpening) anyway. You can only influence (a bit) by how much, Jan |