Scanner recommed or wet plates or flat art

[Joseph Kayne]

Do you recommend the Epson 850 or something else dedicated to wet plates and flat art---no transparencies or negatives..... Thanks.

[Jim Andrada]

What size do you want to scan? Would you want to enlarge after scanning? If so how much? If the originals are small enough the Epson could be OK. Larger items could be stitched but it would be nice if the scanner is big enough to handle most things in one pass.

[Joseph Kayne]

What size do you want to scan? Would you want to enlarge after scanning? If so how much? If the originals are small enough the Epson could be OK. Larger items could be stitched but it would be nice if the scanner is big enough to handle most things in one pass.

Would like to scan the 8x10 plates and print up to 40x50

[Pere Casals]

Would like to scan the 8x10 plates and print up to 40x50

Flat art is not challenging for scanners, V850 reflective scan area if 8.5 x 11.7".

8x10 plates should be easy to scan "on bed", perhaps you may place something in the corners of the plate to separate plate from glass some 0.5mm to avoid newton rings.

When you place the "area guide" on bed... V850 recognizes it and it uses the low res lens (4800 dpi teoric, less than half in practice, some 2000dpi) and it is able to scan 8x10.


For this easy work you can even save some money by purchasing the V800.


V850 can collect an insane amount of information from a 8x10 plate, propably you won't scan with the possible max resolving power.

[Jim Andrada]

8 x 10 should be OK at the lower max real resolution outside the central scanning area. If the reflective art is larger it might be an issue. I used an Epson 750 and it was OK for scanning 8 x 10 prints. There are better scanners but the step up i$ a big $tep indeed.

[Jim Andrada]

8 x 10 should be OK at the lower max real resolution outside the central scanning area. If the reflective art is larger it might be an issue. I used an Epson 750 and it was OK for scanning 8 x 10 prints. There are better scanners but the step up i$ a big $tep indeed.