I would like to know, if the brand of flatbed scanner quality is in the end going to effect the quality of my pictures, ie. if I have a better than average camera, and a bottom of the line scanner am I defeating my purpose. Will I be limited to the capabilities of my scanner.

-- Rebel Johnson (rebelyel@HiWAAY.net), February 09, 1999

Answers

I would think that it would depend on what you are planning on using the scanned photos for. Do you need high quality scans for photo printing or are you planning on scanning for placement on the web or to send via email? Or is there another use that you have planned? I would recommend you choose your scanner accordingly.

I work for the company that created the PhotoSmart web site for Hewlett Packard. They make the PhotoSmart Scanner which is designed purely for scanning photos, slides and negatives. Check it out, the address is:

http://www.photosmart.com

Another good resource, besides this excellent site, is Usenet. Check out the newsgroup comp.periphs.scanners and see what kind of opinions you can get there. It's a very active group.

Good luck!

Mike Emler memler@panmedia.com

-- Mike Emler (memler@panmedia.com), February 11, 1999.

If you're serious about using the results in any photographic way, I'd steer clear of the $59 cheapie flatbeds. Agfa, Microtek, Umax, and Epson all make good units, but you should plan to spend $200-300 to get one that will give reasonable results. The good news is that you don't need to spend $1000-2000, at least if you're just scanning prints. (Although any of the low- to mid-range units may frustrate you if you're trying to get clean detail out of deep shadows. - They all tend to have noise in the shadows.)

-- Dave Etchells (hotnews@imaging-resource.com), February 13, 1999.

I need a scanner for old WW1 photographs 5x7 that I can scan in and add words then e-mail etc.

-- Don Pearson (dhprbce@gtemail.net), June 02, 1999.