I've gotten to the end of my rope with my search for a reasonably priced scanner that's easy to use and produces decent scans of the beads I sell on eBay. I thought I'd solicit recommendations from anyone who absolutely LOVES your scanner. Also, I might just throw in the towel with the scanner and switch to a digital camera, but the camera has to have a top notch macro feature that allows extreme close-ups. I have an older Olympus that doesn't quite do the job I need. Anyone out there who just swoons over the performance of their digital camera?? If so, why?
I use PaintShop Pro to fine tune any images, so image manipulation software is really secondary. I've gotten to the point where I dread doing the scans for new items because it's become such a pain in the a$$. I still have stuff I bought in Tucson that I haven't listed yet because I just don't want to deal with the scanner. Anyone want to have a go at this?? Please?!?!?!?
]I thought I'd solicit recommendations from anyone who absolutely ]LOVES your scanner.
well, i do love mine. it's marketed as "for 3-D", and has always done a great job. HP scanjet 3500c
1200 dpi/48-bit
----------- @vicki [SnuggleWench] (Books)
formatting link
newest creations:
formatting link
----------- I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all.
I just bought an HP 3970, which is also supposed to give good "3-D" scans. I hate it. I can't get the preview to match what actually comes out in the scans - not even close. The fiddling I have to do to get a half-way decent scan works for one color/size/shape bead, but not the next so scanning sessions take hours. I currently have 37 new bead colors/styles to scan and I just can't get myself motivated enough to tackle it!!!
there who just swoons over the performance of their digital camera?? If so, why? <
I'll bite! I used to use a scanner (went through two generations of Microtek, and they were good for the price). Last summer I got a camera and I'd NEVER go back! The scanning was slow (given the same PC setup), the editing was a PITA and there were certain bead colors I just couldn't get right no matter how hard I tried (Bullseye neo-lavender, and the equivalent in Moretti). I'd have to flood the entire image with color correction to make it work (granted, I was just using Microsoft Picture-It, not a better graphics program).
Now I have an Olympus C-4000. I paid $530 for it with a BUNCH of goodies like an extra 128 MB memory card, batteries and charger, wide angle lens, large carrying bag, filters and a mini tripod. I got it on Ebay. I LOVE THIS CAMERA!!!!!! There's a macro setting and a super macro, several built-in settings, and the possibility to set and save 4 custom setting combinations. I can turn this baby on, go to my M1 setting, and have it all ready for shooting beads, exactly as I want. The only thing I have to adjust is F-stop (my choice, depending on whether I'm shooting a single bead or a set) and the white balance (another maybe, depending on the color and background I use). I can shoot 8 sets in about 15 minutes, even with a degree of fussiness and occasional bracketing of shots. Then I upload them to my PC and just use the Camedia software that came with the camera. I think the pics I get are pretty darned good.
I do want to get PSP or Corel at some point (I miss Corel!) but it's not for the photos themselves. The one serious limitation is that layering isn't possible, but I don't need that for the auction pix, just for setting up brochures and fancy business cards.
Beyond macro-land, I still love this camera. I took it on an hour-long walk yesterday to our local riparian preserve. Shot 92 pix in high res and got some spectacular shots without any editing beyond a little cropping. Here's
4:
formatting link
(see the bee?)
formatting link
formatting link
(my lunch companion)
formatting link
(I love this color!) Oh, and here's the bead I made based on the Ocotillo pic:
formatting link
I think this camera is an excellent value, and great for all-purpose photography as well as the beads we need to shoot. I get scolded for not taking it outside more often. I've also taken great pix of my kids, a few night shots, and other odds and ends. It does the job for everything. I'm even considering selling my beloved Canon AE-1, which I've had since high school.
]I just bought an HP 3970, which is also supposed to give good "3-D" scans. ]I hate it. I can't get the preview to match what actually comes out in the ]scans - not even close.
have you played with the control panel????? that's really odd - i don't seem to have any trouble with mine [knocking on the side of my head]
----------- @vicki [SnuggleWench] (Books)
formatting link
newest creations:
formatting link
----------- I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all.
Yes, and though I think of myself as able to intuit what to do within most software, the program that came with the scanner is NOT easy for me to figure out. Plus, I'm used to scanning directly into PSP, but with the HP I can only do one scan at a time that way. In other words, I have to go to the menu, choose import, choose TWAIN and then preview and THEN finally scan for each item. And I only have a few variables I can set doing it this way. Otherwise I have to work from their 'control panel' which saves the scans to a separate file folder, which forces me to open individual scans later in PSP. My old scanner allowed me to set up the whole scanner bed with beads and then I could scan individual 'jobs' directly into PSP. At least that way I could lay out 6-8 strands of beads and scan them in about 5 minutes and then go to PSP to refine, color correct and crop the scans. Unfortunately my old scanner has developed a red shift that has gotten impossible to filter out or I'd still be using it.
I HATE new scanner software! I wish you could just buy one and stick with it... BUT NOOOOOOOOOO they are all proprietary to the unit! ARGH!!! I feel your pain!
]And I only have a few variables I can set doing it this way.
okay - that's the way i do it - from within PSP. but i have all kinds of settings to play with. sorry you're having the problems!!!
i HAVE a Sony Mavica digital camera with a 14X optical zoom. Tink used to use one, too. but i never get pictures as good as the ones from the scanner.
----------- @vicki [SnuggleWench] (Books)
formatting link
newest creations:
formatting link
----------- I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all.
I have an older microtek scanmaker that seems to do a good job. It does require separate scans and doing the file , twain, select, twain thing over and over. they have a newer model in the 6000s that may have better software. and you can find it for less than $200. Just in case you really want to search, the newest consumer reports has cameras and scanners.
LOL!! Thanks, but it was a Microtek 4900 that went bad on me after only a year. That was the second Microtek I've had and I didn't like it as much as the first one, but that one died on me too. Thought I'd try a different brand this time and am just frustrated as all get out. I looked at the Consumer Reports article when I got that issue last week. Unfortunately they concentrate on the way scanners scan *flat* photos or documents - after all, that's what most people use them for, right? I actually bought a Canon CanoScan LiDE that did stunning work with photos but had absolutely NO depth of field at all so my beads were sharp and clear only where they touched the glass, fading fast to mere blurs. Luckily Costco took it back even though there really wasn't anything wrong with it! As you can see, I've been through a few of them lately...
I've got a 3500c, too, and I also love it. I have a digital camera, as well, but I can't say I'm especially impressed by the image quality -- not to mention that it eats batteries like nobody's business. If I'm in a hurry, I just slap whatever on the scanner and have a good image in under 5 minutes without setting up lights, fiddling with camera settings, and so on.
The only thing I don't get, though, is why anything blue is so hard to image. Camera or scanner, no difference. The blue just takes over the entire image and no amount of fiddling in PhotoPaint will fix it. It doesn't appear to be equipment failure....
No but really, I just LOVE my camera (Sony Cybershot, I forget the model#). But you know when the love happened? When I read the manual! Now I love taking pictures. Funny how that happens. Heh!
Okay - this is good info. My older Olympus doesn't have all the bells and whistles you mentioned - things I need for the close ups! I looked it up on CNET and see it gets good reviews from users there too. Your bead photos are just fine and the outdoor shots were fantastic. My old SLR is an Olympus so I'm kind of partial to them too.
I was perfectly happy with my flatbed scanner (Umax Astra 1220U) which I got in uh, 1998 or so, and I put up with adjusting the colors in every single scan --until I got my digital camera. It's a Nikon Coolpix 775, from 2001, so there are better models for the same price now, it has optical zoom and macro, and I can do LOTS more with it than I could with the scanner. The pictures are worlds better; this is a pretty-good-for a-scanner scanner image:
formatting link
This is a digital camera image:
formatting link
Hope this helps, Georgia
(BTW, I do not think this thread is OT--you want the scanner/camera to take pictures of beads, right?)
Excellent comparison! I looked at the new Nikons on CNET last night too. I liked some of their features so I'll keep your review in mind. I'd still like to find that perfect scanner but I don't think any of the manufacturers realize how many people on eBay and elsewhere use a scanner for their auction/store items. LOL!! Thanks for answering!
vj found this in rec.crafts.beads, from Arondelle :
]The only thing I don't get, though, is why anything blue is so hard to ]image. Camera or scanner, no difference. The blue just takes over the ]entire image and no amount of fiddling in PhotoPaint will fix it. It ]doesn't appear to be equipment failure....
**smile** it does, doesn't it. i keep playing with both the hp and PSP controls [try switching to Paint Shop Pro] and what with the "gamma" controls and the "contrast" controls, i can usually get pretty close.
----------- @vicki [SnuggleWench] (Books)
formatting link
newest creations:
formatting link
----------- I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all.
vj found this in rec.crafts.beads, from "Georgia" :
]this is a pretty-good-for a-scanner scanner image: ]
formatting link
]This is a digital camera image: ]
formatting link
actually, **to my eyes** the scanner picture is clearer. in the camera image, the beads tend to get fuzzy on the edges. but again, that's just me!
----------- @vicki [SnuggleWench] (Books)
formatting link
newest creations:
formatting link
----------- I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all.
I don't see a lot of fuzziness in those particular pix, but I HAVE seen bad cases of the "fuzzies" on many digicam pix. It drives me nuts that some folks don't understand depth of field, or else have cameras that can't compensate. I play with F-stops repeatedly, depending on whether I'm shooting a single bead closeup or a set. I want everything to be as crisp as possible.
vj found this in rec.crafts.beads, from "Karen_AZ" :
]It drives me nuts that some ]folks don't understand depth of field, or else have cameras that can't ]compensate. I play with F-stops repeatedly, depending on whether I'm ]shooting a single bead closeup or a set.
if i had any idea what that meant, i'd try it. don't try to explain it - others have tried, and it never makes any sense to me. i can't get my mind around it. maybe that's why i stick to my scanner?
]I want everything to be as crisp as possible.
so do i. GETTING that is something else again.
----------- @vicki [SnuggleWench] (Books)
formatting link
newest creations:
formatting link
----------- I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all.
InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.