Dear Sheila
The RAF Museum purchased a Microtek Scanmaker 9800XL A3 Scanner (1600 x 3200
dpi) with the transparency option (a separate lid to the scanner)
http://www.microtek.nl/Product.php?ThisPage=Scanners&Product=Detail&P_Id=75
and a Mictotek 4000tf Film Scanner
http://www.microtek.nl/Product.php?ThisPage=Scanners&Product=Detail&P_Id=72
in January of 2003.
I would echo the comments made by James about his Microtek products.
We have found the above combination to cope with all our demands, in
particular the 9800XL for hi-resolution scanning and the demands of a high
intensity project to create (low(ish) resolution) reference images quickly
for our Collections Management System. As the 9800XL does not have a draw
for transparencies they cannot get stuck etc... The two lids have not proved
a problem for us.
Best wishes.
Kevin Ward
Head of Collections Management
Royal Air Force Museum, www.rafmuseum.org
Grahame Park Way
Hendon, London
NW9 5LL
Tel: 020 8358 4885
Fax: 020 8200 1751
Mailto: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sheila Perry [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 15 January 2004 11:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: scanner question
Hello all,
We are setting up a digitisation project in the National Galleries of
Scotland and we wondered if anyone on the list had experience of using the
HP scanjet 8250 which comes with a built-in transparency attachment, which
we would use for high res scans both of 5x4 transparencies and photographic
prints. However there is a suggestion that this scanner will not be good
enough and particularly that there will be problems with scanning
transparencies 'through glass'. Alternatives suggested include the Microtek
Artixscan 4500T SCSI, Microtek Artixscan 2500 SCSI, Microtek Artixscan 1800
Firewire, LaCie BlueScan 48 USB/Firewire Scanner. Does anyone have
experience of any of these, particularly for anything involving
transparencies and/or works of art? We are concerned that the
above-mentioned alternatives may not offer as good a resolution as the HP
(and most are much more expensive) or that they will not be as good for
scanning photographic prints.
There are other operational and strategic concerns involved in this decision
but at the moment I am just asking for technical advice/opinions from
members of the group as quickly as possible.
Thanks.
Best wishes,
Sheila Perry
National Galleries of Scotland
Confidentiality: This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named only and
may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on
them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this e-mail and highlight
the error.
Security Warning: Please note that this e-mail has been created in the knowledge that
Internet e-mail is not a completely secure communications medium. We advise that you
understand and observe this lack of security when e-mailing us.
Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are
free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the
recipient should take steps to confirm that they are actually virus free.
|