Scanner Question...

[Eternal Wind]

I figure getting advice from the pros in here might work best. It's not a question about the cel art itself, but it's still relevant to collecting and displaying.

I've been thinking about getting my gallery back online, but as of now, I have no scanner. What brand is a good brand these days? What do you all use? Are you happy with the choice? Any problems scanning in pan cels?

Thanks in advance!

[sensei]

I bought a Canon Canoscan LIDE 90, which I like very much. It reproduces the look and feel of pencil lines on paper much better than any previous scanner I owned or used. It does tend to scan dark, so I have gotten in the habit of including a bit of the scanner lid in my scans and then correcting it to a neutral white in MS Picture Manager. But overall I find it handy and very easy to use.

One of the options in the ArcSoft PhotoStudio, a software program that comes with the scanner, is a "Splice" command. This will take two scans and digitally merge them into a pan image. It takes a few tries to succeed, and sometimes you can see where the two have been joined a little crookedly. But for images the size of RS display images the results are more than acceptable.

Hope this helps. Overall, I'd stay away from "All in One" units that print, copy, and scan, as these will tend to do one thing well (usually print) and the others at best adequately. Plus they are bulky, while the Canoscan is small, portable, and easy to tuck away on a desk when it's not in use.

[toonybabe]

I also have the Canon Canoscan LIDE 90 and I really like it. It wasn't too expensive (like $50 or $60 bucks) and I picked it over more expensive scanners because the scanner bed isn't recessed into the plastic too much - I try to avoid that because it makes a shadow on my cels when I scan them. I have a problem now, though. I recently bought a Macbook Pro and I want to hook up my scanner to it but I lost my original software. Unless I can find software that will make it work with a Mac I will have to buy a new scanner.

For oversized cels I usually just scan them in two seperate passes and then stitch the two sides together in Photoshop. Or I just take them to scan at my school - we have a large bed scanner but I usually have to wait in line to use it.

So, ya, I would highly recommend the Canoscan LIDE 90.

[ginga123]

i agree, but i have the Cannon LIDE 200. ($80) I love that this machine doesn't need a powercord-- it feed/power is through your USB cord attached to your computer/laptop. it's portable, scans fast, and it doesn't automatically crop the image unless you specify using the driver/software. it does most colors nicely, but i sometimes have some cels that have difficulty scanning due to the shade(s) of red or purple in them. other than that, concur 100%!

[Caroline]

well, since the issue of $$ wasn't really raised (LOL!), i'll recommend my epson expression 10000 XL... it's the cadillac of scanners, imho.

[ginga123]

lol i just brought up price cuz they did lol i actually got a discount on mine because it was the floor model and the last one at office depot

[pixie_princess]

I figure getting advice from the pros in here might work best. It's not a question about the cel art itself, but it's still relevant to collecting and displaying.

I've been thinking about getting my gallery back online, but as of now, I have no scanner. What brand is a good brand these days? What do you all use? Are you happy with the choice? Any problems scanning in pan cels?

Thanks in advance!

I have the Canon 8800F.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/contr ... elid=15561

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-2168B002-Ca ... B000V2QCQI

It's pretty good. I've had it since Sept 2008, and I haven't had any problems running it with our os Vista (64bit). Judging by reviews, it plays well with Macs also. Scanning times are fast, but it's not what I'd call portable. If you want to scan in negatives, it does a rather decent job of scanning in 35mm, and you can get it to work with older 110 negs also.
Color reproduction is quite nice. All of the scans I have up in my gallery during/after Oct 2008 are done with this scanner. Previous to that I used a dslr, and a different canon scanner. Canon makes some nice products.

I've never experienced an issue with its reproduction of pinks or reds. They've always been rather vibrant. I know I've seen some people mention that their reds look like browns if it is a certain shade. I think that failure to reproduce adequate color is not an option for a scanner that is expected to properly scan in negatives and slides.

Pancels need to be taken in multiple passes and photostitched. The scanner comes packaged with Photoshop Elements 5.0, and other goodies.

Price wise I paid 101.00 via Amazon (a gold box special or daily deal I guess).

[pixie_princess]

lol i just brought up price cuz they did lol i actually got a discount on mine because it was the floor model and the last one at office depot

Bwahaha! Discounts are good

[Eternal Wind]

Thank you everyone for your responses so far! It's been very helpful.

[iceman57]

http://www.anime-beta.com/phpBB/viewtop ... 963#310963

[zerospace]

I have a Canon 8400F (and an 8600F ... pretty similar). I've had the 8400F since late 2006, and I love it. The 8600F is my backup, and it scans pretty much the same way as the 84. Both are very good at picking up proper colors, especially for sketches, which makes life really easy. I use both in conjunction with Photoshop CS4 (which has by far the best merging tool for oversized stuff).

I think pixie_princess' 8800F is the newest version of mine (since the 8400F and 8600F have both been retired from Canon's line now).

[Sky Rat]

I usually use my scanner at work which is an Epson Perfection 2450 Photo. It does have the problem that the bed is recessed so I’ve experienced the problem with shadows sometimes…I also use my dad’s scanner which is a different Epson model (I don’t know which, but it’s a scanner/copier/printer combo.) It has a flatter bed and less problems with shadowing.

I generally like the Epson brand though, my scans come out a lot nicer than what I got with my first scanner (I don’t remember which brand it was but my scans didn’t turn out so great…I really ought to re-scan about 50% of my gallery come to think of it….)