Does the scanner make a difference in how well the scanned image comes out?
jo1ene
3:52 am on Feb 12, 2005 (gmt 0)
Not really, if the purpose is to use said image on a web site. You'd be knocking the quality down to "save for web" anyway. What's the use in having a super high quality scan?
danmccarthy
3:54 am on Feb 12, 2005 (gmt 0)
If you had a REALLY poor quality scanner (1990?), it could make a difference. but for use on the web, in general, almost any scanner will do.
Bubzeebub
4:20 am on Feb 12, 2005 (gmt 0)
thanks
rickwells
12:46 am on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
The better the original the better the final web site image. A poor scanner will not capture the shadow detail very well. Scanners with a rating of around 3.0d will get you good results. Some scanners come with excellent image enhancement software which is more often better than a raw scan being altered by someone who may not be very experienced in Photoshop etc.
danmccarthy
4:51 am on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
please allow me to rescind what I said. as a photographer, I should have remembered: If it's inexpensive, it's not going to be good enough for me.
(but seriously: rickwells has it right. dynamic range is the key to a scanner's quality.)
Bubzeebub
2:23 pm on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
I'm using one of those all-in-one scanner/fax/copier/printer machines. Is that good enough to scan a decent looking photo or will the clarity be lost?
danmccarthy
4:02 pm on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
It's tough to say. My advice is to scan it at the best resolution the scanner offers, and see if you like the result. It doesn't sound like you have to pay for the scan, do you?
Bubzeebub
4:51 pm on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
Nope...I have the scanner. Are there scanners with high resolution? If so, what would be the purpose of it?
danmccarthy
4:56 pm on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
There are definitely scanners with higher resolution than others. Higher resolution is needed for printing, especially printing enlargements. Higher Resolution COULD also be necessary on the web. Say you had a photo of a person, but it wasn't a closeup. If you had a high resolution scan, you could crop the photo tight around the face, and put just the face on the web, and you could probably get it to look good.
rickwells
5:59 pm on Feb 13, 2005 (gmt 0)
Don't get too hung up on high resolution unless you intend to scan and then enlarge for print work. If you want stuff for the web, remember that your jpeg/gif etc file will be saved at 72dpi and this is how it will be viewed on any computer monitor. Any half decent scanner these days can give you a raw 600dpi file so there's plenty of scope for enlargement if you need to crop close. Remember the earlier comments about dynamic range - you could scan on a cheap scanner at 600 dpi and end up with a lot less detail than if you'd scanned on a more expensive machine at 200dpi! I would also reiterate my earlier point about good image enhancement software which is often bundled with decent scanners. At the end of the day, you know what sort of quality you are prepared to accept and if you get that from your "all-in-one" machine, then great!
