imacon scanner

[parakiet]

these days imaconscanners are being sold for 3000 a 6000 euro

i was wondering..

is it worth buying an imacon precisio 3 (built in 2001)

or is it just "lost" money when i compare it with buying a nikon D3 or other prof DSLR

keeping in mind that those scanners ARE 7 years old!

[jetcode]

Since it seems that professional photography is 95% digital (guesstimating based in discussions with pro's) I would highly recommend getting a digital camera unless you are planning a long career in LF or MF film and need a scanner.

[Darryl Baird]

You're decision might partly be based on how much film you already have that needs to be digitized, plus the formats you already shoot regularly. I think the Imacon offers many opportunities to bring a professional scan to film formats from 35mm to 4x5 (I use a 343 and stitch two scans together from a 4x5 sheet). The scanner is useful to bring old images up to an excellent level for future digital printing. If you are already shooting 120 roll regularly, I'd highly reccomend the Imacon. I use it for 120 square, 6x7, 6x9, 6x12, and 6x17. The 6x17 scans are a joy to see in 24" X 76" prints.

I also own a Canon 1Ds, MkII (16.7 megapixels) and it isn't my first choice for shooting if I have time, energy, and large print sizes in mind. I don't make prints I get from it beyond the 17x22 size. It is fast and excellent, but it has it's limits... particularly, it's not a view camera and can't replace the controls I get when shooting sheet or roll film with the tilts, shifts, etc.

[parakiet]

first it was an option, now it's a dilema

i don't have an archive full of mf dias (probably 100 pictures)

so it's more for future use.

once i would have one, i would prefere my sq-ai above my D200

[Darryl Baird]

Ok, I think (if I were you) I would wait until a good used Imacon scanner with Firewire ports became affordable. One reason I haven't bought a bigger Imacon -- or others (interesting threads about large format professional scanners here: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=33327) is the need to go with a SCSI-2 port, which means an additional hardware purchase and a seemingly constant battle with compatibility with ever evolving operating systems on my Mac computer. I have enough gray hair already.

first it was an option, now it's a dilema

i don't have an archive full of mf dias (probably 100 pictures)

so it's more for future use.

once i would have one, i would prefere my sq-ai above my D200

[Ted Harris]

Buying any used Imacon shouldn't be a consideration for future work. They are great for high volume production because of their speed. However, if you don't have a large reservoir of work and you are shooting more large format than smaller formats then the same 3000 - 6000 (actually probably even 2000) can be better spent on a used high end flatbed scanner such as a Creo IQsmart or Supreme, Fuji Lanovia or Screen Cezanne; alternatively you can also look at drum scanners in the same used price range from Heidelberg/Hell, Screen, ICG, Optronics and Howtek. Which you will find most easily and at what price will depend on where you are in Europe. Chances re it will be the Fuji Lanovia.

[sanking]

Buying any used Imacon shouldn't be a consideration for future work. They are great for high volume production because of their speed. However, if you don't have a large reservoir of work and you are shooting more large format than smaller formats then the same 3000 - 6000 (actually probably even 2000) can be better spent on a used high end flatbed scanner such as a Creo IQsmart or Supreme, Fuji Lanovia or Screen Cezanne; alternatively you can also look at drum scanners in the same used price range from Heidelberg/Hell, Screen, ICG, Optronics and Howtek. Which you will find most easily and at what price will depend on where you are in Europe. Chances re it will be the Fuji Lanovia.

Ted,

Some time ago I asked you a question about the marketing strategy of Creo/Kodak with respect to the IQSmart3 and EverSmart Supreme and Select models. You indicated you would respond, but I think you may have forgotten to do so.

My understanding is that the EverSmart Supreme and Select models are about twice s expensive as IQSmart 3. I assume from this that that the EverSmart is better, and many people have told me that it is, but how much better? Will Creo/Kodak do comparison scans for interested parties?

Also, a used EverSmart Supreme sells for more than twice the cost of a Cezanne? Is there a reason for this? You often cite a Seybold study that rated the Cezanne over the EverSmart Supreme, but money usually speaks louder than words and the market does not appear to agree with that study.

Any comments on any of the above would be most appreciated.

Sandy King

[Darryl Baird]

Ted, glad you weighed in... I took in soooo much information from you and others about the LF scanners, but forgot to ask about the ports. When I looked at the two used dealers recommended, everything seemed scsi based. I would like a firewire port if possible, having weaned myself of all scsi devices in recent years. Do you have info on the availability of scanners with more modern bus ports?

[Scovell001]

Hi, putting my 4 penneth in as an Imacon 949 owner. Only the later Imacon 343, 646 & 949 had a firewire port instead of SCSI. The later model precision III had a factory upgrade available which changed the SCSI to firewire. You need to bear in mind that there was no speed increase in doing this as this was limited by the memory in the scanner.

You may want to search the net for a SCSI to USB adapter, I know that Belkin make one. A colleague of mine uses this with his Topaz scanner linked to a G5 running osX Leopard and all is fine.

You need to also be aware that only the 949 and later X5 had the built in light defuser. Having tested the 343, 646 and 949 side by side. I can vouch that this diffuser brings a marginal increase in quality, but more so in disguising dust and small scratches.

The 343 or Flextight Photo is so damn slow you wont believe it. 20 minutes to scan a 617 transparency!!! If you can find a 646, Precision III or 848 then thats the one to go for.

[Baxter Bradford]

You can do far worse than a Precision III. I have the predecessor and get great results. SCSI isn't really an issue. I have Leopard and a G4 via n Adaptec 2906 card. Firewire converters can be problematic, but solutions and advice are available on imaconusers@yahoogroups.com

I would only swap for a 949/X5, but agree with Scovell, that performance improvement would be marginal, the cash adjustment would be significant! Speed not an issue unless being commercial for others' work (the X5 is 20x faster than mine) the choke point being the dust removal etc.