scanner or printer

[ignatiusjk]

I only have enough money for either a scanner(epson V750) or a printer(Epson 3800) which should I get first and why. I really have convinced myself on these two items but if you have another way to go let me know ,but I really like these two items.

[Erik Larsen]

Just a thought,
If you can't get your negs digitized by the scanner how are you going to use the printer:) I guess you can always have someone else scan for you. I know, don't be a smart a$$:)
Erik

[George Stewart]

Get the scanner and a small photo printer at the same time. You will be pleased by the quality and price of some of the HP photo printers. Then, get the large Epson at a later date. Otherwise, I don't see getting one without the other.

[ignatiusjk]

My computer has some printing ability.

[Brian Ellis]

I wouldn't want a scanner without a printer and certainly not vice versa. So if the $1200 cost of a 3800 is your absolute limit for both, I'd compromise somewhere, eg a used 4990 scanner instead of the 700 (the reviews indicate no significant difference in quality between it and the 700) or the 700 and a refurbished Epson 2400 printer. I used an Epson 2200 for several years and now I own a 3800. I see no difference in quality of prints between the two and if there's no difference between the 2200 and the 3800 there surely is none between the 2400 and the 3800. The only difference for me between the 2200 and the 3800 is the 17" width of the 3800 vs the 13" width of the 2200 (or 2400). There obviously are other scanner-printer combinations that would cost $1200 or less besides these, these are just ones with which I'm familiar.

[Scott Kathe]

Are you interested in printing black and white, color or both?

I would think about what Brian said. I would definitely go with a scanner first, you can always have your digital files printed elsewhere. I have the Epson 4990 and it's ok, the V700 and V750 are only marginally better from what I gather so that should save you a chunk of cash IF you can find a used 4990. I've been printing black only on a sub $100 Epson printer with MIS inks and it sure is economical but l am limited to letter size prints. I want to step up to a larger format printer but with the price of decent paper, inks, the printer and the time to make the prints I'm thinking about sending my files out to be printed. I don't like that workflow much since I loose control at the final step. I would really like the Epson R2400 but it would break the bank, maybe I'll look into the Epson R2200 again or an R1800.

Scott

[Mike Boden]

Undoubtedly, you're going to want both the scanner and the printer if you truly want total creative control. So it's hard to advise what is the better choice to purchase first, but I can offer what path I followed.

Before I owned either, I was paying a lab to drum scan and print my images. I got really tired of paying for both, but I felt the cost of scans was ridiculous high at 50 cents a MB. I was paying about $150 per scan for 300MB files, but the files weren't big enough for the size prints that I like to make. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it gets real expensive real quick. So, I found a used Howtek 4500 drum scanner and jumped into the learning curve real fast.

Personally, I'm so glad that I bought the scanner before the printer purchase, because it now seems to make sense. Despite the steep learning curve, I have more control over the quality. Furthermore, I've scanned certain challenging sheets of film that I never would been willing to pay for beforehand, because they were questionable images.

Once I felt that I had the scanning process under control, I then dived in deeper and bought a large format printer. Now this has been another wonderful purchase because of the immediate results. I no longer have to wait for the three-day turnaround to have prints made at the lab, and as a result, I think the quality of my images has improved even more. I initially started with a custom profile that someone made for me, but I'm now making my own.

So you have to look at what you want to get out of each machine specifically and how much time and effort you're willing to invest in learning and mastering the process. I'm glad that I followed the path that I did. I feel in hindsight that it was a logical progression. I got control of the camera and exposure first and then mastered the scanning and processing. From there I took control of the print.

Good luck.

[Scott Kathe]

West Coast Imaging gives you up to a 200meg scan of 4x5 for $15 on a Creo IQ3 dry mounted (much more wet mounted).

There is a minimum order of $100 with this type of scan. That being said I may end up giving it a try. The 'traditional' darkroom is starting to look like a bargain;) As does a decent DSLR:(

Scott

[Michael Heald]

I'm using an Epson 4990 and Epson R220 with MIS inks for excellent 8x10 B&W. Go for the scanner and a smaller printer.

Michael A. Heald

[Greg Lockrey]

I'd get the 3800 first (it's a great printer for the money).... you can make prints and pay for itself on a weekend. You can get the scanner later. It still costs a lot of money to get an equal level film scanner. You'd have to do a lot of scanning to break even. I had printers long before I had scanners since my first "scanner" was a DLSR hooked up to my Sinar and an enlarging lens where I can stitch up to about 3x3" image area. It still does a decent job of making "scans" of very large art pieces too big to "stitch" on my flatbed. I have the 750V too (along with the Epson 10000XL that I use for reflective art copy) and I would only rate it as an okay film scanner and no where near the level of the 3800 printer if you were to compare apples to oranges.