However, don't expect too much from scanning. If you really want to dive into it you should look at SharpEye, which I am told works much better.
On the other hand scanning has improved a lot in the last couple of versions in Finale.
Johannes
A-NO-NE Music wrote:
I have some questions from my experience last night. The original was MacFinale98 output, scanned in 300dpi. The archived printout was very clean, and nothing was too tight or anything. Yet I after all felt I should had created from the scratch instead of scan.
- Missed a lot of measures here and there, one or two measures at a time, while inserted empty measures where totally unrelated spots from missed measures. I was unable to see how SmartScore misunderstood like this. - All the triprets became two 8th with double-sharp attached. - All the tied notes, if not the beginning of the tie, and if accidental is attached, became natural but cancellation of the accidentals were invisible... strange. - Missed a lot of ties even though the original was rather obvious.
The scanned image's x-y was straighten in Photoshop prior to SmartScan. I assume 300dpi is good enough. What else I could had tried to make
SmartScan better?
-- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
