How does the saphir ultra 2 compare to the umax powerlook III. I realize that they are the same scanner. I have the powerlook III and it does a lousy job on negatives. Also its positive scans are a little dim and off color. In short I think that the powerlook software is sub standard. Does the linotype software do a better job on negatives, and positives?

thanks

-- Jon Miller (jmill@cybertime.net), April 22, 2000

Answers

Whether the scans are dim and off color may be simply that your monitor is not properly calibrated. I found that, even though my monitor is a self-calibrating Apple Color Sync monitor, buying an external, hardware puck for calibration was the best time saving investment I've made in computer equipment for digital imaging. Although I haven't used the Saphir, I'm pretty sure the Lino software comes with a calibration utility; I have a calibration utility with my Microtek Scanmaker 5 flatbed (aka the Agfa Duo scan), which is in the same price range as the scanner your using and the colors are about 97% accurate before I do any tweaking at all.

-- Howard Slavitt (info@naturelandscape.com), April 22, 2000.

I agree, an uncalibrated monitor can be a contributing factor in these situations. If you have PS 5.02 or better, the Adobe Gamma Program does a relatively nice job of approximating monitor calibration. I have a Powerlook II, and in manual mode, it does produce dark scans. A fact even UMAX technical support conceded to me. Have you considered using a calibration software to correct your problems? I recently purchased Monacco EzColor. So far, EXCELLENT using the reflective targets. Transparency targets are alos available and are future tests for me. All in all, money VERY well spent.

-- Gary D. Phillips (gphillip@lexmark.com), April 27, 2000.