Should I get a new scanner?

On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Kirk McElhearn wrote:

> Any recommendations? Again, I don't need high quality; would rather
> have a self-powered scanner, something that is not overly noisy,
> and something that doesn't take up much space.

I like the Brother MFC420CN (multi-function scanner, fax, copier, and
printer). It has an Ethernet port and I'm able to scan over the
network. Unfortunately their drivers aren't Intel native, but it
still works nicely.

I use both the LiDE 80 (home) and LiDE 30 (work) with a MacBook Pro.
Canon released updates to their scanning software and drivers back in
February that supposedly gives compatibility with the new Intel Macs.

I agree that Canon scanner software has been "not great" and this new
version makes a bad situation worse. Just my experience with the new
software:

- Crashes alot---and I really mean alot
- Sometimes it will hang badly enough that a reboot is required
- Processor hogging problem not fixed (hogs one core)
- The scanner hardware buttons are no longer recognized
- For some reason works with left USB port but not the right USB port
- No proper TWAIN support (so scanner only recognized by CanonScan
software)

If all you need is really basic scanning, then it is possible to get
the thing to scan. But the software is not even beta quality.
(Canon seems to be particularly bad at this transition thing---I seem
to recall that they took an inordinately long time during the OS9 to
OSX transition to supply software and drivers.)

This is a pitty, because I think the Canon scanner has very nice
hardware with a sleek compact design, reasonably good optics for the
price, and USB power. The quality of the software is barely
tolerable if you only have to do occasional scanning. I would
imagine that it would quickly become maddening if you had to deal
with it on a daily basis.

Anyone care to comment on how Epson scanners fare with regards to
Intel Mac compatibility?

Tomoharu

On Aug 22, 2006, at 10:32 PM, Mike Cohen wrote:

>> Any recommendations? Again, I don't need high quality; would rather
>> have a self-powered scanner, something that is not overly noisy,
>> and something that doesn't take up much space.
>
> I like the Brother MFC420CN (multi-function scanner, fax, copier, and
> printer). It has an Ethernet port and I'm able to scan over the
> network. Unfortunately their drivers aren't Intel native, but it
> still works nicely.

I've already got a printer, and have had bad experiences with
multifunction gizmos...


Kirk
           Author of: The Mac OS X Command Line: Unix Under the Hood
                      http://www.mcelhearn.com/unix.html
                - - - - - -
              Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
           Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more

On Aug 22, 2006, at 10:32 PM, cheshirenekomac.com wrote:

> I use both the LiDE 80 (home) and LiDE 30 (work) with a MacBook Pro.
> Canon released updates to their scanning software and drivers back in
> February that supposedly gives compatibility with the new Intel Macs.

Yeah, I'm using that software on a G5...
>
> I agree that Canon scanner software has been "not great" and this new
> version makes a bad situation worse. Just my experience with the new
> software:
>
> - Crashes alot---and I really mean alot
> - Sometimes it will hang badly enough that a reboot is required
> - Processor hogging problem not fixed (hogs one core)
> - The scanner hardware buttons are no longer recognized
> - For some reason works with left USB port but not the right USB port
> - No proper TWAIN support (so scanner only recognized by CanonScan
> software)

Re your problems: have you removed the button manager startup items?
I did that first thing when I bought the scanner a few years ago.
They screwed up the system seriously, and used a lot of CPU time.
>
> If all you need is really basic scanning, then it is possible to get
> the thing to scan. But the software is not even beta quality.
> (Canon seems to be particularly bad at this transition thing---I seem
> to recall that they took an inordinately long time during the OS9 to
> OSX transition to supply software and drivers.)
>
> This is a pitty, because I think the Canon scanner has very nice
> hardware with a sleek compact design, reasonably good optics for the
> price, and USB power. The quality of the software is barely
> tolerable if you only have to do occasional scanning. I would
> imagine that it would quickly become maddening if you had to deal
> with it on a daily basis.

Yes, it's excellent hardware, small (fits on a shelf in my office
easily) and no power supply... I don't use it daily; maybe a few
times a week, so it's not that much of a problem. Most of my scanning
is creating PDFs from paper or printing from the scanner.


Kirk
            Author of: Take Control of Users & Accounts in Tiger
                       http://www.mcelhearn.com/tco.html
                - - - - - -
              Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
           Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more

I'm using a Canon Lide 60 and for basic scanner jobs; it's OK; not great, but gets the job done. However, what I am wondering is what recommendations anyone has for a scanner to be used to transfer 35MM slides onto my Mac and or burn to a CD?

I'm using the similar, but even older, Canoscan N650U with an Intel Mac without problems. Just download an older PPC version of GraphicConverter <http://www.lemkesoft.com/> that works with the scanner driver (I'm using GC 4.6 as I have a licence for it) and use the Canon driver installer to put the driver in Library/Application Support/GraphicConverter/Plug-ins/ and it seems fine running in Rosetta.

On 8/29/06 10:53 AM, "bruceplummer" <bruceplummercox.net> wrote:

I'm using a Canon Lide 60 and for basic scanner jobs; it's OK; not great, but gets the job done. However, what I am wondering is what recommendations anyone has for a scanner to be used to transfer 35MM slides onto my Mac and or burn to a CD? -- If you want to unsubscribe or change your address, use this link: http://emperor.tidbits.com/webx?unsub.3c3f6899!u=305447ab

I was just online last night starting to look for exactly the same thing. My wife uses a Canon LIDE 50, and it is adequate for the document scanning we do for genealogy, but I need to scan a bunch of old 35 MM slides, and want my own scanner...light-weight for travel, like the Cano LIDE 50 or 60.
--
<watson.allencomcast.net>
Scripts for OE and Entourage: <http://homepage.mac.com/allen_a_watson/AppleScripts_For_You>
Entourage questions: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/>

If Vuescan is taking five minutes likely you have it set to scan at
some kind of super high res or set for multiple passes. Vuescan is
fantastic, flexible as can be, durable and accurate...You can do no
better. I use it with old and new scanners and the programmer is
always working on it, updating it and tuning up its various
modalities. I would respectfully say that you just do not know how
to use it! I never use my epson scanner software for example but go
immmediately to Vuescan updates when I am using a new scanner. I
would say it would be just the same with a Canon. HINT: Pay for the
full pro version of Vuescan so that the updates are forever free as
it is most annoying to find oneself with a new scanner that requires
additional payment for an upgrade of the lower priced version.

On 8/31/06 at 12:12 PM, watson.allencomcast.net (Allen Watson) wrote:

> I was just online last night starting to look for exactly the same
> thing. My wife uses a Canon LIDE 50, and it is adequate for the
> document scanning we do for genealogy, but I need to scan a bunch of
> old 35 MM slides, and want my own scanner...light-weight for travel,
> like the Cano LIDE 50 or 60.

I've been really soured on Canon's scanner support after some bad
experiences last fall. The LIDE series has some nice hardware, but the
drivers for my LIDE 30 crapped out when I upgraded from Panther to
Tiger, and when I tried to talk to support about it (in conjunction with
the other problem I'll get to) I got a fairly rude brush-off. In
addition, my boss had just gotten a CanoScan 8400F to scan a bunch of
old photos from the office archives; while the first one worked well, we
managed to drop it off a table and break the hinge, and the second one
had a real problem with scan delays (up to 90+ seconds between pressing
the 'Scan' button and when it actually started to scan). Canon support
was completely unhelpful with this problem as well.

We ended up returning the second 8400F within a couple of days, and
picked up an Epson Perfection 2580 instead. The image quality wasn't
quite as nice as the CanoScan, but the software worked much better; no
problems with installation or delays, and always worked smoothly. In
addition, basic support for most Epson scanners has been built into OS X
for a while now; our old Perfection 1250 had pretty crappy image quality
compared to either of the new models, but it's fired right up in Image
Capture without problems every time. See
<http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/support/supAdvice.jsp?type=
highlights&noteoid=68937> for a list of Epson scanners supported
natively in 10.4.4. (I've never had luck with built-in support for Canon
scanners.)

Back to your specific question: Both the 8400F and the 2580 came with
slide-scanning support. Both use a plastic slide-holder that fits into a
notch at the edge of the scanning surface, to keep the slide(s) steady;
the 8400F's held more slides, and the scanning software let you pick
slides easily out of the positions in the holder. The 2580 has a
film-strip reader built into the lid, that can be used for 35mm film
without opening the lid; might be handy for some people, but we didn't
use it. The image results were pretty good for both scanners.
Unfortunately for what you wanted, both of them were fairly bulky
compared to the LIDE models, and need an external power source; the
Epson was about twice the thickness of my LIDE 30 and somewhat longer,
while the Canoscan 8400F was twice again the thickness of the 2580 and
even longer and bulkier.


Travis Butler
tbutlermac.com

...Cats are the proof of a higher purpose to the universe.