A3 flatbed recommendations?

tim rudman · Mar 1, 2007

Hello everybody
As some of you may know I am an analogue photographer/printer and my knowledge base of digital matters in general is, to say the least, patchy ;-)
I am in the market for a larger flatbed scanner (A3 size) to scan my individual prints, which are B&W toned, often lith prints and may contain some subtle high values and delicate colours.

I have been at FOCUS (UK show) for the last 4 days and hoped to survey the market and get some helpful advice on the choices availble. Unfortunately, only Epson was represented in the A3 scanner market and nobody there was able to give me any information ('we're all really about printers here and nobody knows much about our scanners').

I would be very grateful to hear people's views on the pro's and cons of what is available and most suitable for my needs.
Many thanks in advance for your help
Tim

sanking · Mar 1, 2007

tim rudman said:
I would be very grateful to hear people's views on the pro's and cons of what is available and most suitable for my needs.
Many thanks in advance for your help
Tim

Tim,

A3 type tabloid scanners are available in every price range. If all you plan to do is scan prints no larger than 12X17 you might be able to get by with a Mustek at around $200 USD. I don't know anythiing about their quality, but you see a lot of these for sale on ebay.

DPI concern is not relevant here if you only plan to scan prints because you only need about 300 dpi and everything out there will give more than that.

Stepping up in quality you can buy a new Microtek 9800XL that has resolution of 1600dpi for about $1300 USD Or you could also look for a used 9600 with top resolution of 800 dpi for less than half of that. The top of the line A3 Microtek at this time has resolution of 3200 dpi, but unless you have other needs you would not want to pay $2500+ USD for that machine.

The Epson A3 scanners are very good. An old one that required SCSI was the 836XL, 800 dpi, available today for less than $400 USD, its sucessor the 1640Xl at 1600 dpi, and the latest Epson Expression 10000XL at over $2600. I think the Epson are slighly better built than the Microteks, and they have automatic focus, at least they did through the 1640XL.

If you want new I think the best choice would be the Microtek 9800XL, or you can take a chance on the Mustek. I guess if all I wanted was to scan prints I would probably take a chance ion the Mustek.

Hope this is useful.

Best,

Sandy King

Bob Carnie · Mar 1, 2007

Hi Tim

We have the Epson 10000xl and are very happy with it. A bit pricy but certainly a workhorse. We can fit 12inch x18 inch prints with one scan on this beast.

Ted Harris · Mar 1, 2007

We have tested and used the Microtek 1000xl at our workshps and find it to be a reliable performer for tabloid size but it is just a hair short of 17 inches.

As Sandy said if you are scanng prints only you don't need the ultimate in quality.

tim rudman · Mar 2, 2007

Ted Harris said:
We have tested and used the Microtek 1000xl at our workshps and find it to be a reliable performer for tabloid size but it is just a hair short of 17 inches.

As Sandy said if you are scanng prints only you don't need the ultimate in quality.

Thanks Sandy, Bob and Ted for your help. I'm a little out of my 'natural environment' here! ;-)
I often hear scanning referred to as a black art and I want to be sure I get the very best quality I can in my scans so I guess I'm hoping that buying the best I can afford will offset some of my current skill shortcomings until I can even the odds a bit more! (- but of course I don't want to pay for auto sheet feeder and other things irrelevant to my needs).

Even if I don't need mega dpi, what about recording fine nuances of tone and hue? Must I go for top of the range here? I sense not from what you say.

Auto focus was mentioned, this sounds quite important to me - ?.
It also raises another question I have been wondering about and put to the Epson staff, (who were quite unable to answer it!) and that is depth of field. I know a photographer who scans vegetables on his flatbed and prints the results after PS editing. The depth of field seems not as minimal as I had assumed so I'm wondering about scanning window matted prints? I have some sealed inside dry mounted window matts and back boards, which I'll otherwise destroy and remount. (I don't normally mount that way but did for a particular show for a particular reason)
Tim

sanking · Mar 2, 2007

tim rudman said:
Thanks Sandy, Bob and Ted for your help. I'm a little out of my 'natural environment' here! ;-)
I often hear scanning referred to as a black art and I want to be sure I get the very best quality I can in my scans so I guess I'm hoping that buying the best I can afford will offset some of my current skill shortcomings until I can even the odds a bit more! (- but of course I don't want to pay for auto sheet feeder and other things irrelevant to my needs).

Even if I don't need mega dpi, what about recording fine nuances of tone and hue? Must I go for top of the range here? I sense not from what you say.

Auto focus was mentioned, this sounds quite important to me - ?.
It also raises another question I have been wondering about and put to the Epson staff, (who were quite unable to answer it!) and that is depth of field. I know a photographer who scans vegetables on his flatbed and prints the results after PS editing. The depth of field seems not as minimal as I had assumed so I'm wondering about scanning window matted prints? I have some sealed inside dry mounted window matts and back boards, which I'll otherwise destroy and remount. (I don't normally mount that way but did for a particular show for a particular reason)
Tim

Tim,

If you don't mind spending close to $3K USD, go for the Epson 100000XL or the Mictrotek 1000XL. Both will do everything you want, and also do good scans of medium format and LF film. A new Microtek 9800XL or a used Epson 1640XL would also do everything you want, at about half the price of the newer equipment.

The optics of most scanners do have considerable depth of fiield, but there is still a plane of best focus. For most purposes putting the material to be scanned on the plane of best focus is not terribly important. However, if you plan to enlarge the scan material many magnifications it pays to find the exact plane of best focus. In tests I did a couple of weeks ago I found that getting the scanned material at the plane of best focus added about 10-15% to the resolution in lppm. For scanning prints, however, I don't think you need to be highly concerned with this issue.

The Epson 1640XL has an autofocus adjustment, and it also allows you to set the focus manually. I assume, but don't know for sure, that the Epson 10000XL also has this. The Microtek 1000XL does not have a focus adjustment, so you have to do this with some type of shims if you want to optimize plane of focus.

Sandy

tim rudman · Mar 2, 2007

sanking said:
Tim,

If you don't mind spending close to $3K USD, go for the Epson 100000XL or the Mictrotek 1000XL. Both will do everything you want, and also do good scans of medium format and LF film. SNIP SNIP
The optics of most scanners do have considerable depth of fiield, but there is still a plane of best focus. For most purposes putting the material to be scanned on the plane of best focus is not terribly important. However, if you plan to enlarge the scan material many magnifications it pays to find the exact plane of best focus. In tests I did a couple of weeks ago I found that getting the scanned material at the plane of best focus added about 10-15% to the resolution in lppm. For scanning prints, however, I don't think you need to be highly concerned with this issue.

The Epson 1640XL has an autofocus adjustment, and it also allows you to set the focus manually. I assume, but don't know for sure, that the Epson 10000XL also has this. The Microtek 1000XL does not have a focus adjustment, so you have to do this with some type of shims if you want to optimize plane of focus.
Sandy

Thanks Sandy
A search shows the Epson is rather more expensive here in the UK. Prices range from 1,750 to 2,500 (= US$4,908 plus extra for the film scanner option). Quite a big price range for the same model.
The description states:
With a resolution of 2400dpi and high optical density of 3.8 DMax, the Epson Expression 10000XL boasts excellent quality up to a full A3. Easy to use, the Epson Scan driver has both automatic and professional modes, the optional A3 transparency* unit enables easy film batch scanning and advanced connectivity is built-in with USB 2.0 Hi Speed and IEEE1394 (FireWire) together with optional networking.
Is the DMax figure good? (I guess at that price it just might be).
Tim

Bob Carnie · Mar 2, 2007

Tim
10000x.
I like this unit for scanning prints and then going to very large 42inch x 60 inch epson prints on watercolour paper.
The results from lith prints are outstanding and at proper viewing distance they hold up very nicely.
We do use the transparancy unit for scanning contact sheets *film* colour and black and white. The results are not bad at low magnification for contact editing purposes.
I keep on hearing about people using these types of scanners for film to print reproduction , but for my money I would not use this scanner for high quality film scanning purposes.

tim rudman · Mar 2, 2007

bob carnie said:
Tim
10000x.
I like this unit for scanning prints and then going to very large 42inch x 60 inch epson prints on watercolour paper.

I like this idea too Bob. I have one like this from Skip Smith (see the WOLP) I had it float mounted and framed. It is hanging in my hall and it looks beautiful.

bob carnie said:
We do use the transparancy unit for scanning contact sheets *film* colour and black and white. The results are not bad at low magnification for contact editing purposes.
I keep on hearing about people using these types of scanners for film to print reproduction , but for my money I would not use this scanner for high quality film scanning purposes.

I suspected as much. I know people who use flatbeds for film too but I have always been sceptical.
Tim

sanking · Mar 2, 2007

tim rudman said:
I like this idea too Bob. I have one like this from Skip Smith (see the WOLP) I had it float mounted and framed. It is hanging in my hall and it looks beautiful.

I suspected as much. I know people who use flatbeds for film too but I have always been sceptical.
Tim

Tim,

There are flatbeds and there are flatbeds. Some of the high-end flatbeds come very close to drum scanners, or may beat them.

Course, these hi-end flatbeds also cost $50K to $100K USD!!

For scanning large formt film the Epson 10000XL would do a good job, assuming magnification of a maximum of about 3X. Beyond that, you probably need to go to a high end flatbed or drum scanner. You could also make fairly decent scans of medium format film on the Epson 10000XL, but for better results go to a dedicated film scanner, Imacon, high-end flatbed or drum scanner.

But I thought you jus wanted to scan prints?

Sandy

tim rudman · Mar 3, 2007

sanking said:
Tim,

There are flatbeds and there are flatbeds. Some of the high-end flatbeds come very close to drum scanners, or may beat them.

Course, these hi-end flatbeds also cost $50K to $100K USD!!

For scanning large formt film the Epson 10000XL would do a good job, assuming magnification of a maximum of about 3X. Beyond that, you probably need to go to a high end flatbed or drum scanner. You could also make fairly decent scans of medium format film on the Epson 10000XL, but for better results go to a dedicated film scanner, Imacon, high-end flatbed or drum scanner.

But I thought you jus wanted to scan prints?

Sandy

It is for prints Sandy. The mention of film was in response to Bob's comment in the previous post.

BTW, I sent you a PM. Did you get it? Somehow it turned up in my PM inbox as well as outbox so I didn't know if it went OK.
Tim

sanking · Mar 3, 2007

tim rudman said:
It is for prints Sandy. The mention of film was in response to Bob's comment in the previous post.

BTW, I sent you a PM. Did you get it? Somehow it turned up in my PM inbox as well as outbox so I didn't know if it went OK.
Tim

Tim,

I did not get the PM. Just checked my message box and there is nothing there.

Sandy

tim rudman · Mar 4, 2007

sanking said:
Tim,

I did not get the PM. Just checked my message box and there is nothing there.

Sandy

I'll try again Sandy

greenlake · Jan 20, 2009

Mustek A3 USB 1200 Pro

So, this post is only close to two year's after Tim's original query. I just purchased the Mustek scanner from Amazon for $170 to scan my 11 x 14 b&w selenium toned prints. The scanner does a beautiful job! My purpose is to make a "BLURB" www.blurb.com book of my Green Lake portfolio. Blurb uses up to 300 dpi scans and the Mustek far exceeds those requirements. Have not yet sent the book off to be published, but the image on the computer that I am downsizing in Photoshop Elements looks unbeatable for $170.00 Frankly, for these purposes its hard to imagine that an Epson 10000 for two thousand more dollars would do that much a better job.

Gary

A3 flatbed recommendations?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency