Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 65907	2006-02-04 01:08:00	Scanning slides and photo negatives	FoxyMX (5)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
427243	2006-02-04 23:37:00	Like you I've been thinking of doing this Foxy. But have been put off because mostly the results from reasonably priced scanners are poor for slides & negs. Also very slow, especially if only one neg or slide is scanned at a time. The review for that unit is very encouraging Bazza and I am just hoping that I will be as pleased with the results as they were because if I knew it wasn't all that good I would buy a much cheaper scanner/printer unit without the slides and negatives capability. I guess there is really only one real way to find out and that is to bite the bullet and go for it. :rolleyes: What do you think of the MP800 and Alan's comments on it? A review I found had lots of good things to say: www.epinions.com Apart from the much larger LCD screen and the different in printing technology there is little between them.	FoxyMX (5)
427244	2006-02-04 23:56:00	All of the new Pixmas use the 1 picolitre printheads the previous models use the 2 picolitre heads the new models as previously stated also use smart chipped cartridges. Read somewhere on the net of chip resetting devices that are offered on a number of generic ink cartridge websites and seem to have a multi-brand application. My 14 month old printer's ink head just died from using refilled ink cartridges and have had to replace it. However the newer inks do seem to have a tendency to over saturate colours leading to darker printouts.AC Are you finding this happening on all printing paper and photo paper? Are you using canon paper? Am asking this because an article I read mentioned that the type of paper you use has a lot to do with over/under saturation. Can you tell me if you have found matte photo paper any good for photos? Bought a Canon IP4200 just over a week ago and haven't tried out printing photos yet. Usually just put them on disk and take to a photo shop.	MMM (5660)
427245	2006-02-05 00:08:00	I don't know about the particular scanner you are interested in but I have a Canon Scanner but never use it for what you want to do. Firstly it is very time consuming and with hundreds of slides and negatives to scan, I would be here until doomsday. My solution: I have a Fuji s7000 digital camera and there is an extension you can buy from Fuji for attaching filters. From an old slide copier from my film days I superglued a conversion ring onto it and now the business end of the slide copier screws onto the end of the lens extension. By using the micro macro setting it will focus down so that the actual picture on the slide fills the frame in the digital camerera. Setting the camera up on a tripod and pointing it at a large piece of plastic illuminated from a window to backlight the slide, I can photograph the slide in about 10 seconds. That equates to about 6 slides a minute whereas with the scanner I would still be messing about So far I have photographed about a thousand slides and negatives and am now in the process of making slide shows and getting them onto DVD'S for my three children, my seven grandchildren and my five great grandchildren. Cheers.	heaton (3697)
427246	2006-02-05 00:21:00	. . . Amazon says the MP760 cartridges are 2 . 5 ounces and lists the MP800's as 4 ounces but that doesn't seem right . Ounces? You wish . We all wish . Certainly ml . :( One fluid ounce is about 25 ml . I bought one inkjet printer because its cartridges held 300 ml . And because it was an old model, shops around town were selling off the cartridges at $5 . I got a lot of pages from that $15 printer . :D	Graham L (2)
427247	2006-02-05 00:54:00	Decisions, decisions Foxy. For me it's mostly indecisions today. The information on that site about the MP800 is impressive. But if you can get the MP760 now at $398, is the MP800 worth about $200 more? I am considering the MP760 mostly for the slide/neg scanning capability. I already have a 4 ink Canon photo printer that gives excellent results. I guess it is the 2 picoliter type. Also have an HP Scanjet flatbed scanner thats good for document & photo scanning. And so, do I really need the MP760? Thats the indecision. It would be nice for the negs & slides, but it's more $$ and it's a big unit, about 19"W x 21"D x 12"H, and weighs 28lbs. Running out of room on the computer desk here, so I think I will pass on this deal. I've also considered the slide copying option that Heaton mentions, using the digi camera, if I can figure some way to mount the slide on the camera. If I were you Foxy, and I did not have an adequate photo printer & scanner, I would grab the MP760 smartly. It appears a quality unit & an excellent deal. Regards.	Bazza (407)
427248	2006-02-05 01:53:00	I only had about 270 slides to do,and yes it is a bit slow but I got there. Depends what size you scan at of course. And did I say how good scanned magazine articles come out.The moire(?) effect was terrible on the brother. The photos I've printed, some scanned off old photos while one of my wife's sisters was down here at christmas and they were going through early family pics, and off the camera, touched up a little, are as good as I've seen from the chemist. When I was single I used to send my negs to a lab in Auckland, but that's by-the-by.But I can live with these !I've only used Canon photo paper, because that's what I've been using for a while now.	Neil McC (178)
427249	2006-02-05 06:13:00	After having read Alan's comments about reviews recommending sticking with the older device and not noticing any difference in quality of print my interest is back to the MP760 again . I am very surprised to hear that, Alan, as I have been Googling my fingers raw and have not come across any reviews like that . My Google skills are pretty pathetic at the best of times however, so that isn't surprising . The reviews mainly come from the likes of steves digicams forum etc and are from actual users posted in answers to questions ( I can dig some up if you like) You can also get a very good comparison by googling for comparisons between the ip4000 (same print head and cartridges as the MP760) and the ip4200 (same print head and cartridges as the MP800) Like Alan says, the MP800's cartridges are more expensive - approx . $5 each dearer than the MP760 but I can't find any information to say whether they actually hold the same amount of ink or not . Amazon says the MP760 cartridges are 2 . 5 ounces and lists the MP800's as 4 ounces but that doesn't seem right Without actually measuring to prove it, the cartridges look identical in size except they now have a snazzy red light that comes on when you insert them into the print head . Of more concern may be the smart chip technology, with this technology once the chip senses that your cartridge needs replacing that's it no go until you replace the cartridge . The older smart monitoring in the Pixma series warned when the cartridge was nearing empty warned again when the cartridge was supposedly empty (this is where the big difference comes in) but allowed you to carry on printing in override mode this often yields a surprising amount of pages before the cartridge actually does fully run out ( I think consumer got upto 12 full photos in some cases) Read somewhere on the net of chip resetting devices that are offered on a number of generic ink cartridge websites and seem to have a multi-brand application . I don't think any third party chip resetters are available yet for the Canon . My 14 month old printer's ink head just died from using refilled ink cartridges and have had to replace it . This is becoming very common now especially with the advent of Trademe and people selling generic cartridges for Canon Pixmas at around $5 . 00 per cartridge at that price bracket you are only going to buy trouble . ( In the last little while I have purchased two Canon i865 high end printers from Trade Me both I picked up for a song because the heads were clogged both were running the same generic cartridges that when inspected contained ink with the viscocity closer to engine oil rather than quality printer ink) however there are very good generic Ink brands out there I know because I sell them, good generics cause no more problems than originals, the price of course is a lot closer to originals (around $15 . 00 per cartridge) Are you finding this happening on all printing paper and photo paper? Are you using canon paper? Am asking this because an article I read mentioned that the type of paper you use has a lot to do with over/under saturation . Which paper to use cannot be readily answered as every ones perception of what their eyes find best differs . As an experiment on my own Canon i865 I printed out 10 copies of the same photo using the same printer settings with 10 different types of photo paper, the results were very interesting with some very striking differences in both saturation and vividness between the brands and different grades of the same brand . Of more interest was the fact that few people agreed on what was the best result overall and no 2 people agreed on the first three in the same order . AC	Alan Cotrell (6634)
427250	2006-02-05 09:45:00	I would prefer the MP760 to my MP780. They just never had one in stock that day. Hook	Capt.Hook (5586)
427251	2006-02-05 18:02:00	As an experiment on my own Canon i865 I printed out 10 copies of the same photo using the same printer settings with 10 different types of photo paper, the results were very interesting with some very striking differences in both saturation and vividness between the brands and different grades of the same brand . AC I did a similar test a few years back and preferred the premium coated paper even though some might have thought it was over-saturated . So, will probably print most of my photos on matte photo paper . I think that there is another category that will affect which paper to use apart from the saturation etc, and that is what kind of subject is involved . I personally prefer matte for portrait style, especially if you have used softening cum misty effects in an image editor, . . . . . . glossy for solid structures like kids toys, buildings [but not old wooden historical buildings - eg, the old church and shearing shed on our farm], animals which have a sheen on them anyway eg . cattle, horses [but not sheep], and cars, . . . . Glossy also for water shots, night shots outside which involve lit up areas, and insurance photos of articles to make them look less used - I wish! The PhotoGloss inkjet paper I used was good on medium to deep colours, but looked wishy washy on pale colours and text was awful, probably due to the cheap printer . I read somewhere that you use less ink on the glossy photo paper so that's a plus . But anyway it's been really good reading your posts . Have learnt a lot . Hope there are more threads appearing on this forum re: editing photos, photography, scanning etc . Cheers :) PS:FoxyMX - sorry to butt in on your thread :blush:	MMM (5660)
1 2