RE: [Leica] Scanner recommendation?

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Hans-Peter:

As a heavy-duty user of the HP Photosmart - earlier version - I have to say
that for negatives, color and black and white, you can't really go wrong
with it, especially for the price. I have, however, been really disappointed
with slide results.

I use mine - with PhotoShop - primarily to produce black and white prints
from XP2Super negs. I used the Epson Photo Stylus 750, Epson  black ink, and
either Epson photo paper or water color paper. And I get quite pleasing
results.

Yes, the scanning is a bit slow. But the jump is speed involves a very
considerable jump in investment. So think seriously about what you are
looking to do here.

What color work I have done has easily compared to the quality I get from
the "lab around the corner."

Give it a try - you won't be disappointed. And don't too quickly write off
the idea of using PhotoShop and attempting some serious digital printing.

B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> Hans-Peter.Lammerich
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 7:45 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Scanner recommendation?
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I am also interested to buy a film scanner. Again, I am not
> into "digital
> darkroom", "Photoshop" and the like, but simply want quick
> and easy results. I
> have seen websites which praise HP's Photosmart S20, but more
> recent tests in
> German computer magazines were less enthusiastic about it.
>
> Mainly I intend to use it to preview and archive colour negs,
> XP2 or T-Max 400
> CN, using it as a sort of digital contact sheet and loupe,
> from which I then
> could evaluate and select the best negatives for
> conventional, chemical printing
> or for illustrating a website. I may also put them on a CD to
> circulate it among
> my friends rather than to invite them to a slide show. But my
> concern is that it
> may take hours to feed a few rolls of film into the scanner.
> Yes you can order a
> conventional contact sheet from any photo dealer, but you
> then wait one week for
> the results.
>
> Making my own prints through the computer is currently no
> option for me. I live
> in town and within 48 hours you get reasonably priced quality
> prints on Kodak
> Royal paper (or the Fuji requivalent). Although not "pro",
> but still "consumer"
> quality, they seem to outperform any demonstration print I
> have yet seen from a
> (consumer) photo printer (Epson Stylus Photo or HP 970 Cxi
> with "Photo Ret
> III"). By the way, the cost for one "chemical" print is less
> than the cost of
> glossy photo paper for a computer printer, not accounting for
> ink cartridges,
> miss prints, hard/software cost and, most important, the time
> spend at the
> computer.
>
> Prior to that I mainly used consumer slide film (Fuji Sensia,
> Kodak Elite). You
> buy it cheap, say DM 60 to DM 80 for a pack of 10 Elite 100
> (including voucher
> for processing), get it developed overnight, view it with a
> loupe and select the
> best frames for printing. I liked the projected slides, but
> even the digital
> prints were not up to the quality of consumer prints from
> negatives, take one
> week rather than 48 hours for Kodak's "Royal plus Service"
> and are limited to a
> maximum size of 20 by 30 cm. Moreover, there seems to be no
> good slide film in
> the ASA 400 plus range, but plenty of excellent print film.
>
> Kodak's Picture CD would work perfect for me and for the
> above described
> purposes, but here in Germany they offer it only in
> connection with prints
> which I do not want at that stage.
>
> Hans-Peter
>
>