[filmscanners] Re: HP PhotsSmart - questions (on topic)

["Rich Koziol" <rkoziol3@comcast.net>]

On 8 Aug 2005 at 2:25, Arthur Entlich wrote:

Thanks Arthur for a very informative post, which also happens to be
very related to my original question :-)

Wish it was a bit sooner, as I tore into the scanner and at this
point will have to thrash it.

It was made in 1997, so it's been used, or set for a long time, in a
room off the kitchen (my donors house). It was giving me strange
results, as posted.

The original software that came with it was useless.  The current
version on HP website, somewhat better.

This is why I wanted to see what if anything could be cleaned, before
I continued.  There was one mirror fairly easily accessible, which
was quite fuzzy.  I dug deeper and moved some things that should have
not been moved.  This unit is not made to be taken apart and cleaned
;-((  Maybe no great loss, from what you describe.

[more comments below]

On 8 Aug 2005 at 2:25, Arthur Entlich wrote:

> Unlike probably most of the people on this list, I actually owned a S10,
> and an S20 (the USB uprage version), and also did a survey on them,
> because they were a pretty problematic product.

Yes, among other things, the two switches on the front were flaky -
that I fixed :-)

> Firstly, I would probably NOT try to clean the unit, unless you know for
> a fact it is dirty (you may notice halos around brighter objects or
> other high contracts transitions on slides or negs).

Too late :-)

> The reason I suggest against it is because this scanner is a highly
> complex device mechanically.

I've been inside some complex things, but this one puzzles me.
Several of the components in the optical path seem to be very
sloppily mounted.  There were no adjustment screws or precise stops
for any of them.  Not sure how these folks put it together.

>  It has a stage tha stage that transforms itself from being a
> reflective scanner (for up to 4x6" prints at 300 dpi, to a transmissive
> slide to negative without carrier scanner.  Each use request the stage
> to alter the design of the input slot, and it is literally done with
> movement of cams and gears and mirrors.

All still works, but worse than it was before.  Couple of the tiny
lenses were not very clean, but I could not do much better with
alcohol.

> The actual ppi/dpi this scanner produces is considerably lower than
> the maximum 2400 it claims in transmissive mode, due to the nature of
> the optics and focus, and perhaps the CCD itself.  I believe it was
> tested at about 1000 ppi/dpi in highest transmissive mode (slide/neg).

I was hoping to do better than the Target (in store) photo lab, which
scan at about 1200dpi.

> It is a good starter film scanner for email and lower resolution use.

I'm a scanning beginner, but have a good size box of negs and slides.
Would it make sense to buy a used, but better scanner?  If so which
model?

I know it's a dumb question, but going to e-bay with a shotgun method
is not very productive either.

Do not want to spend > $500.  My pictures will never get printed
anywhere :-)

[snip]

> However, if you are going to only scan reflective images, you would be
> better off getting a flatbed scanner.  They can be had very
> inexpensively new and even less used.

Have an older flatbed, but positioning 3x5 (those that I have) is
frustrating.  Colors are not that great eather.

I'm thinking of S20 from e-bay as a handy snapshot scanner - it's
very easy to operate in that mode.  For negatives, maybe something
better.

Regards,

Rich Koziol

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body