Print

Print


Thanks everyone for your further contributions to this discussion; it's
good food for thought.
At this time I don't produce nearly enough large-size work to justify
spending more than a few hundred $ on a new scanner.
Fortunately, I don't need my painting reproduced at this time so I don't
have to worry about leaving it at Colourgenics for a few days and then
returning. They can scan it the same day (although they charge an extra $50
for that), so I just have to find something to do for a few hours while
waiting for it.
It does seem odd to me, that scanners aren't more widely available with a
flush bed. As Natalya said, you'd think that'd be easy to make; in fact
scanner manufacturers could probably easily offer a removable raised edge
so the consumer could have it both ways. Oh well...


---
*Emily S. Damstra*
natural science illustration
Guelph, Ontario
(519) 616-3654
*[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>*
www.emilydamstra.com
emilydamstra.wordpress.com
Twitter: @EmilyDamstra

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Natalya Zahn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I do have the Epson Expression 11000XL - And I love it every time I use
> it, however, it does have slight lips on the 2 short edges (the front
> facing/longer edge is flush), which can cause predictable issues with
> shadowing when trying to scan XXL pieces. When tiling really large work I
> also sometimes hit the hinges at the back where the lid connects, which is
> frustrating.
>
> You would think flush bed edges all the way around would be an easy thing
> to feature, but alas. Overall, this scanner is one of the best pieces of
> equipment in my studio and I'm really glad I chose to invest in it (I also
> rarely work so large than any of the issues above become serious problems).
>
> One of my local giclée art printers also has a photo studio dedicated to
> documenting oversized artworks - he takes a series of tiled photos (with
> very fancy cameras) then stitches them together into one file, which he
> uses to make high-end reproductions. The method always seemed very
> cumbersome to me, but there aren't very many other options when trying to
> capture an image of an artwork that's large enough to measure dimensions in
> feet, rather than inches.
>
> -Natalya
>
>
>
> > On Jun 10, 2016, at 10:53 AM, Britt Griswold <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/10/16 8:51 AM, Emily S. Damstra wrote:
> > Britt, I'm not confident that I'd be able to get a good result using my
> own camera; I really need an image that's as good as a scan.)
> >
> > Won't know till you try!
> >
> > If you are serious about scanning larger images, an 11 x 17 Epson
> printer is what you need to look at, but those are over $2000. At that
> price level, they may have taken the time to design a lipless bed...  I
> think Natalia Zahn has one of those.
> >
> > Britt
> >
> > Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the
> instructions at
> > http://www.gnsi.org/resources/reviews/gnsi-sciart-l-listserv
>
> Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the
> instructions at
> http://www.gnsi.org/resources/reviews/gnsi-sciart-l-listserv
>

Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at
http://www.gnsi.org/resources/reviews/gnsi-sciart-l-listserv