Matthew -- I think we would all like to hear how this works out. I for one, do not have a workable linux scanner at this time. My microtek is not supported by linux/sane. So I am looking.
If the Epson Perf 2400P works well I would really consider getting one after the holidays are over. -rdg On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 19:53, Matthew Vaughn wrote: > I have to thank you all for the load of responses. :] > > I'm rather intrigued at the number of these that have suggested the > flatbed Epson Perfection models. Upon some research, I found that most > of this scanner series has complete SANE drivers, sports relatively high > resolutions, and comes at a very affordable price. For this reason, I'm > starting to seriously consider the Epson Perfection 2400P, with its > 2400x4800 DPI at 48 bits, the 35mm film-strip adapter thingy (whether > this is equitable to a dedicated film scanner or not is questionable, > but this flatbed does indeed deliver twice as many DPI as the film > scanner I had been considering previously), and its very low price: $129 > at Circuit City. Considering the praise these receive from Gentoo users > I've asked... > > Someone mentioned that 35mm film scanning becomes impractical below 2000 > DPI. I'm inclined to agree, but I'm happy to report that this scanner > shoots me above said threshold (not by much, though). I don't need an > absurdly high resolution, though, especially when you consider what I > intend to use this for. > > I am an amateur photographer. I also like to dabble in graphic design, > so I usually end up trying to integrate the two fields. The result is a > project I'm working on at the moment (it's, for once, coming along > nicely) which is an attempt to fuse a digital photographic portfolio > with writing and high-end graphics. I hope to treat it like a working > resume. The images contained there would certainly not be large, and > would serve a variety of functions ranging from becoming elements of the > design itself to simple galleries accompanied by text in some form. > We're not talking about massive detail here. This is a web presence; > size is limited. I don't intend to provide full-size copies. It's good > for me to have them on-hand, in either case. > > Digital photography, some argue, is the wave of the future. I frankly > don't care for it when it stands alone. The inherent detail of 35mm film > still far surpasses the images that can be produced by any digital > camera today and it suffices for my purposes to use a scanner as an > intermediary between the film and the computer. Aside from the web-work, > I intend to touch up the images for distribution in one form or another. > As I said, though, the primary function is to establish a portfolio. > > Thanks again, guys. :] -- It is vital to remember that information is not knowledge; that knowledge is not wisdom; and that wisdom is not foresight. - Arthur C Clarke -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
