Thank you all for this very thorough advice - it is tremendously appreciated.
I think I may have placed too much emphasis on the project I have on my desk at the moment - this purchase may have been pushed the final mile by current clients, but in reality, Britt is right - I've been looking forward to the day I finally upgrade, and the scanner I end up with will be used weekly - it certainly won't collect dust once I've moved on to the next paid job.
I don't know as that I generate any more finished artwork than the rest of you fine professionals, but I certainly work in many, many layers, with many pieces requiring 3 rounds of different traditional media rendering that then get scanned and layered together in Photoshop. Cutting out any time that I'm currently using to stitch together smaller scans (and this is more often the case than not) would definitely be a benefit over the course of weeks/months/years. The higher resolution will be handy whether a client is asking for it or not.
*I have no need for transparency scanning, though keeping the product software in mind (compatibility with my OS and ease of upgrades going forward) is a very important note and something to pointedly research.
I will report back when I've got a new machine to experiment with! I also have a new website upgrade coming that will showcase the type of work I'm doing now and maybe make clear some of my needs for this scanner (my current portfolio is quite dated).
Many thanks again - LOVE THIS LIST!!
On Sep 4, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Britt Griswold wrote:
> I think Natalya is pretty prolific, so cutting out the time needed to stitch her preliminary art before finishing in PSD might be a decent economic proposition for her. $3000 is 30-40 hours of paid time. So if you can save 30-40 hours over the course of two years in paid assignments, she should do it. If she deals with transparencies on a regular basis, getting a small scanner for $500 or less, might make sense as well.
> On 9/4/13 9:42 AM, Bruce Bartrug wrote:
>> I would concur with both the above posts (which I've left attached for reference.) Smaller scanners
>> have the highest resolution and the lowest price. Here, for example, are the specifications for the
>> Microtek i800, which has a legal-sized bed.
>> Many of the larger scanners that aren't exactly cheap have a lower resolution, at three times the price.
>> (You can see the whole list of Microtek pro scanners at this url:
>> http://store2.microtek.com/shop/index.php?cPath=21 )
>> Epson's pro model legal-sized scanner has higher resolution and only costs $1000.
>> But you can get the same resolution in an 8.5x11 scanner for less than $200.
>> I have the V500 and its scan quality is good. I find the standard Epson software versatile enough
>> for my purposes, something I can't say for the standard Microtek software.
>> Be very careful about spending $2000 on something you will only use once in a while. As mentioned,
>> check out prepress scanning options for larger work, and/or a local professional photograper.
>> Photographing artwork can be tricky and most pro photographers will have polarizers for both lights
>> and camera, which completely eliminates any reflections. In the long run using outside services
>> when needed can save money unless you are routinely scanning work larger than 8.5 x 11 or 14. Even
>> there, at least to my mind, using the smaller scanner and zipping together partial scans in
>> Photoshop would seem the best option.
> Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at
Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at