[Table of Contents] [Search]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [scanning vs colour copies]



At 20:06 08/07/98 -0700, Charles wrote:
>I have not done scanning, but having seen some it is my impression that the
>net quality of any but the most expensive models would not equal that
>available at a good copy shop's Kodak, Xerox or other top-of-the-line color
>copier.  A 3x5 color photo copied & enlarged to 5x7 or even 8x10 is
>astonishingly good, and the durability, I think, equal or superior to
>almost any other system.

Actually, you can get a pretty decent scanner for about $600 (and I'm
talking Canadian dollars, so I'm sure you could get it for much less if you
happen to be in the States). That would give you digital copies of whatever
you want, that you can then crop, resize, make collages or just do whatever
you'd like with. As for how it looks when printed out (in comparison with a
colour copy), well, that has nothing to do with the scanner (at least, at
that point, although it would be best if it was scanned in at a high
resolution in the first place, of course) but rather with the quality of
your printer.

I forget what the original question was (???) but if one had to make a
choice between paying for, say, 10,000 colour photocopies and paying for a
good scanner and printer, well, I'd say go for the scanner and printer.

Ron :)

                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                       P  S  Y  M  O  N  ?  ?  ?  ?
                       http://home.istar.ca/~psymon
                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]