What about older Scitex flatbeds?

[sog1927]

It seems that the collective wisdom here is that the current generation Kodak/Creo/Scitex flatbeds are phenomenally good. Unfortunately, they'd break the bank for me and domestic logistics prohibit setting up a LF enlarger (even though used ones are remarkably cheap these days). In fact, domestic logistics prohibit even setting up my current MF enlarger. Thus, I find myself being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the hybrid age (as someone who has earned his living as a softwaore engineer on high-end supercomputers for the last 3 decades, I find this somewhat ironic ;-) ). Recently, some of the older Scitex flatbeds (notably the 342) have been appearing on the auction sites for not much more than the high-end Epson/Microtek "prosumer" scanners. I can't find any technical documentation for these scanners on the web (not surprising after a succession of corporate takeovers), so I thought I'd ask my questions here.

1) These scanners advertise >5K dpi - is that true over the entire bed, or is resolution reduced outside of the sweet spot? Since I'm mainly interested in MF and LF scanning, what can I expect on 6x6 and 4x5? What about if I go completely nuts and start shooting 11x14?

2) What sort of Dmax is reasonable to expect?

3) How, in general do they compare to the IQSmartN (N=1,2,3) scanners? How about to the "prosumer" (Gad, I hate that term) flatbeds from Epson and Microtek?

4) Can one use mounting fluid with these scanners?

5) Any other suggestions for used high-end scanners?

Thanks!

Steve

[Gordon Moat]

A few issues to consider. First is availability of repair parts, such as the lamps, which should be user replaceable. Another is software, which is almost impossible to get, so it should be with the scanner. Then there is the matter of running an old computer in order to operate the scanner, since newer software or newer operating systems might not work.

You can try contacting Genesis Equipment, and ask them about parts, or possible issues. I notice the oldest scanner they list is an EverSmart, though often they will have a Jazz, or Jazz+. While Creo use to have a history of their scanners on their site, after the Kodak buyout I am having trouble finding that.

You might find a reasonable 3.5 to 3.7 Dmax from an older Scitex (prior to Creo buyout of Scitex scanner division). This would be quite good. The oil mount stations were a feature on later Creo EverSmart and iQSmart, though probably tough to find used, and way expensive as new options. A workaround for oil mounting would be to use a glass film carrier off an enlarger, or just the glass from similar.

Many of the older Creo, a few Creo Scitex, and maybe some Scitex scanners had user removable glass. This was a feature to allow cleaning the glass from both sides. It also allowed replacing the light (bulbs, tubes) in the scanner by the end user. If the glass can be removed easily for cleaning, this is another way to do oil mounting.

In comparison, even a quite old high end flatbed should provide better Dmax than anything Epson has sold. A few exceptions are some of the Linotype Hell, or Heidelberg scanners, some which are UMAX, and many which max out at 3.4 Dmax, though not much resolution. File size limitations running older scanning software on older operating systems might mean a 1 GB or 2 GB maximum file size; which means the maximum resolution might not be reachable on large format film.

So what other scanners to investigate? Basically, I advocate buying from a refurbishing place that has a warranty, though if you find a place on EBAY that offers a return policy, then maybe that would be safe. Repair costs could eat any savings, and the cost of buying software might be just as bad. Add the cost of an old computer, unless you already have one. Fuji FinePix and Fuji Lanovia are good choices, if somewhat heavy. A Heidelberg Topaz is another good choice, but make sure you get the proper software with it. In AGFA, there was an XY model, which was actually a Fuji FinePix. Then there is the Screen Cezanne, or Cezanne Elite.

Below that range, at least in Dmax capability, are Heidelberg (Linoscan, LinotypeHell) flatbeds, though many were variations on UMAX PowerLook scanners. Supposedly better quality control and better software (LinoColor Elite) than UMAX. SilverFast software is available for many, to allow using on newer computers, though the cost is high. These are still a step above many Epson or MicroTek choices, except in resolution; something you would need to check.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Ted Harris]

Hi Sog,

I can't recall the specifics on the 342. In general older Scitex/Creo can be excellent values as long as you take into consideration the caveats taht Gordon mentions. Further check the actual model. A few were not actually manufactured by Creo (e.g. the Jazz which is a rebadged Microtek) and that doesn't necessarily mean anything but you do need to searchharder for info. Finally you wil need to invest in legcacy software and sometimes a legcacy comuter to run most of these machines.

[kembree]

Hi Sog,
I have a Scitex Smart 342L, which I bought on EBay a couple of years ago for $1250. Needless to say, it has taken me that amount of time to get it up and going. I got into it thinking it would be easier than it was! Now I am at the stage where the unit makes scans, but won't calibrate right, so they are not very good, albeit still quite sharp. But, the unit make a horrible grinding noise which scares the crap out of me!

So... I still have high hopes for it, but all the above issues mentioned by others are legitimate concerns and a lot depends on the amount of patience/time you have. If anyone has any ideas for me, btw, I'd love to hear them. Good luck!

[Lenny Eiger]

It seems that the collective wisdom here is that the current generation Kodak/Creo/Scitex flatbeds are phenomenally good.

I think that is because there are a couple of people on the forum, and one who just passed away, who were very large proponents of flatbeds. I think it is fair to say that PMT technology (drum) is still considered superior. None of us has the time to really research it fully, especially since it can take a year to master the software, to understand what one is looking at on the preview vs what one will get, etc. I would say there is a huge difference between a prosumer flatbed and a drum, but, to be fair, not quite as much difference from the top end Eversmart.

1) These scanners advertise >5K dpi - is that true over the entire bed, or is resolution reduced outside of the sweet spot?

Only the ones that "lawnmower" about can claim this. The others have a much lower optical resolution. There is a huge difference between optical resolution and how many pixels a scanner can create. Remember also that non-lawnmower flatbeds are scanning an entire line at a time - you may have 4000 pixels for an entire line. This is different (in most cases) where you have a drum that can do 4000 for every inch of the film.

Since I'm mainly interested in MF and LF scanning, what can I expect on 6x6 and 4x5? What about if I go completely nuts and start shooting 11x14?

5) Any other suggestions for used high-end scanners?

I still think the Howtek 4500 is the best bang for the buck out there. It makes an amazing scan off a 4x5, or 8x10. It is a drum, not an approximation thereof.... It can't go past 10 inches, but I personally don't feel the need to.

I figure all that's needed at most is 20,000 pixels. That's a print resolution of 500 dpi at 40 inches. That's a 4x5 at 4,000 dpi, or an 8x10 at 2,000 dpi. If its sharp enough, edge to edge, like a drum, it makes a beautiful print. Can't beat it with a stick...

If you need more, have to crop, etc. you can always find somewhere to scan for you at a higher rate, say 8,000, for instance.

Unless you want to do contact printing in the darkroom, then I agree, you would be completely nuts to go to 11x14... it simply isn't needed in scanning and wide format printing... IMO.

Lenny

[audioexcels]

Lenny...

IMHO, The IQ3 or IQ2 will easily hand it to the Howtek 4500 or any Howtek drum scanner for that matter. It is much more closely a matchup to your Aztek Premier than it is the other pro flatbeds and the better drum machines out there. Howtek drums are really neck to neck with the good pro-level flatbeds from Screen-Cezanne/Cezanne Elite, Eversmart Pro II/Supreme II, etc.

[madafrica]

what software did you use, where can i get a copy

regards Sam

[xavier deltell]

Last week I bought a second hand Scitex Eversmart Pro II
I found it on Ebay and the seller is the representative of Kodak (Creo) in Spain.
The scanner is an impressive with a wide dynamic range and high quality extraction of detail in the images.
I am comparing with my old scans Imacon Precision II and the quality is much higher.
The only difficulty is that the scanner is very large and very heavy