Scanner for Gallery Question

I am considering the following scanner to be used for submitting prints to APUG Gallery as well as for transmission to some of my photographer friends. Also, I would like to explore the possibility of making 8x10 negatives for contact printing AZO from 4x5 negatives since I don't plan to get an 8x10 camera. However, my primary interest is the former.
Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

Micro Tek 6100 Pro $275 plus shipping
Optical resolution: 3200 x 6400 dpi
Interpolated Resolution (maximum): 65,535 dpi (PC)
Lamp source: Cold Cathode ray
Dmax: 3.8 – 4.2 range shadows
Included Software:
LaserSoft Imaging SilverFast Ai 6
Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0
Adobe Photoshop Album SE
Microtek ScanWizard™ 5
Microtek Scan, Copy, Email, OCR, Scan to Web utilities
ABBYY FineReader Sprint OCR
Kodak Digital Science Color Management
Adobe Acrobat Reader

The scanner has capabilities well beyond what you need for posting on this website. You can only post a 150 kb max file in the galleries here with a maximum 650 pixels in the longest dimension. This allows you 75 to 150 dpi resolution if your photograph is 8x10 or so. Of course you might have other reasons for buying such a high resolution scanner.

gma - Thanks for the feedback. I have no experience whatsoever in such matters so appreciate the help. I will explore further potential usage to make 8x10 negatives for Azo contact prints and alternate processes (i.e., if I ever get around to the latter)..

People over on the LF info site (http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/) are probably a better bet than here: many more of them scan LF negs. FWIW I use a Epson 3200 Photo but I'm far from an expert and that scanner is 2 models obsolete now (must rush out and buy a new one tomorrow ... not!).

Good hunting, Bob.

The short answer to you q is that it will probably be just fine, certainly for the print scanning.

The main things that will affect the scan quality are the optics and the Dynamic range (Dmax). The first is under-rated with most people simply going for a high pixel count, manufacturers lambast with high values. To make an A3 print at magazine quality 300ppi from a 5x4 only 900ppi are needed from the scanner, if you decide for example that 8x10 AZO is too small!
However, except top-quality scanner makers, they do not usually make a big thing about the quality of the optics that actually define the lines along which they pack the pixels. It does make a big difference to the effective resolution.

The Dmax is the ability to extract the maximum amount of detail from the neg/transparency. A true figure above 3.6 is good enough for most purposes. Again manufacturers realise the importance of this figure and tend to give downhill with following wind type performance. Colour work is more demanding.

The ability to control the scanner with the software is an important factor in getting consistent results. I've never had much luck with Silverfast and did far better with Vuescan (www.hamrick.com). This will let you multipass scan which improves the effective Dmax fugure by averaging out noise in the darkest areas. It will also allow calibrating rebate for filmbase+fog values to get true black.

Of course having got a decent scan, you will then need to think about colour management and printer profiling in order to get the digital negs to come out as you wish. It is possible to make do without this, but you will soon tire of printing lots of samples/tests.

My scanner is a Canon LiDE 30 that I bought new last year for $39 at a local computer store. It cannot scan negatives, but it works fine for my needs and it came with software that is worth much more than the purchase price. It is easy to use too.

For use in getting prints to digital form, I prefer to use my little point and shoot digital camera rather than my flat bed scanner.