HP Scanjet G4050 and Vista

[Pete Watkins]

I've recently bought an HP Scanjet G4050 and I would like to run it on an old PC with Vista installed. Can anybody point me to the right software to download?
Thanks for looking.
Pete.

[Tobias Key]

Hi Pete

I have a G4050 and I run it with vuescan. The HP software is terrible and clips shadows really badly, with vuescan you get much better files.

[pdh]

agreed.

However I'll also say that my experience of the G4050 is that the scans it produces from negatives are sufficient for web-sharing - but I've yet to get a sharp enough scan from it good enough for a true hybrid process.

[Tobias Key]

agreed.

However I'll also say that my experience of the G4050 is that the scans it produces from negatives are sufficient for web-sharing - but I've yet to get a sharp enough scan from it good enough for a true hybrid process.

I would agree with this also, I only use mine for web based stuff and pay for lab scanning if I want to do anything serious.

[mdarnton]

I bought my 4050 with a little trepidation because of reports like those above, but have been perfectly happy with mine. It doesn't take much of a scanner to pull out enough to make nice 13x19 prints from 5x7 or 8x10 film @300dpi, and this scanner certainly delivers quite a bit more than that (I can't think of any useful reason to go above 1000ppi for normal-size prints, and theoretical limits and pixel-peeping scanner comparisons don't matter much in that context--a shoebox with a CCD in it should be able to deliver 1000ppi), so comments like those above mystify me. I don't use it for 35mm, but I haven't found ANY flatbed that will do 35mm well, and was surprised nevertheless, that it gave me better 35mm result than the smaller format-only Canons and Epsons that I'd used in the past.

Anyway, Vuescan, as everyone says. It's worth buying for this.

[pdh]

No need to be mystified, it's not as though I'm saying it for the sake of being contrary, but simply that this is my genuine personal experience.

If I scan my 5x4 or 10x8 negatives on the G4050, at whatever pixel density, I simply don't get the level of sharpness I do if I stick them on a lightbox and photograph them with a 12mp camera on a copy stand.

The 5x4s go in the original negative holder that came with the scanner, the 8x10s have to go flat on the glass, but I can't see a difference between the results.

There's no means of focusing the G4050, so I can only assume there sample variation or wear or similar to account for the difference.

As I contact print all my LF stuff, it's pretty moot anyway. Once the scans are on flickr or ipernity at 1024x768 or whatever, I can't tell the difference. For 35mm I have a Plustek scanner that does produce excellent quality.

[Pete Watkins]

Thanks for the help and advice. Vuescan 'ere we go!
Pete.