We reproduce printed images that are generally 2" x 3" or smaller (largest would be 5" x 7") and 90% are black and white. Up until now I have shot these outdoors using my CanonA1 with a Macro lens and had them processed through a magenta filter to get a very sharp black and white. I can usually overcome most textured paper problems and can even improve contrast by playing with exposure etc. I would like to move to digital imaging and have had a proposal which consists of a Kodak DCS520 w/100mm Macro lens, ringlight & copystand, a Umax Power Look III flatbed scanner or Umax Mirage II, the core computer system (which would be a Mac G4 500mhz, and appropriate manipulation/archiving software..) and a Kodak 8660 printer. We never enlarge greater than 2 X and in no event to larger than 4 x 6 glossy. Typical problems involve moire pattern from printed images (which has not been a big issue with the camera) and moreso, the textured papers which these images are sometimes printed on...Again, I have been able to overcome that with the camera through angles/light/distance to get satisfactory results. My overall questions relate to: a.) Will the camera proposed be capable of providing comparable images (given the relatively small size?) Are there issues with the digital camera in terms of the moire pattern that may not have existed with the conventional camera? b.) How will I handle the textured paper issue with the scanner? Are there other scanners that might handle this better than those proposed and why? Will the 133 and 175 de-screen on the scan overcome most of the moire patterns for the flat paper scans. c.) Does the Kodak 8660 produce a true photo-quality image comparable to a lab and are the blacks black and the whites white? Please remember that 90%+ of our images are black and white and are used for publication in national magazines on glossy stock. All thoughts/help/suggestions will be appreciated. I have tried to read/surf/ask as much as possible and am still somewhat unsure whether to move ahead on this. My total budget is around $25,000 with some slack if necessary. We do not produce a high volume of images annually (perhaps 4,000) so cost/image difference of $1+ is not important relative to the quality of the output and facility of creating these images. P.S. We also intend to convert existing glossy stock (2,000) and 35mm negatives strips of 4 (4,000) to digital format and would appreciate suggestions here also which would provide quality and decent speed. We were told Nikon 2000 is great BUT will not work on the G4 as SCSI to USB does not work with this? (95%+ of these are black and white shot with T-max 100)

-- Seth Poppel (sethpoppel@aol.com), May 03, 2000

Answers

I'm not going to offer any equipment suggestions in the price range you're considering, due to lack of personal experience with such high end digital equipment.(consider that high end often refers to the position one finds one's end in when purchasing said equipment...) But[you knew there had to be one, didn't you? :-)], if you were considering spending that kind of money on a car, for instance, I bet you'd insist on a test drive...

It seems to me that with digital imaging equipment, as most things in life, there's hardly any substitute for PERSONAL experience. I'd check out any local businesses that might use similar equipment and see what I could find out from experienced users or ask for a referral to some of the existing customers who've purchased such equipment from whoever wrote the proposal. Failing that, or even in addition to it, I'd either rent or short term lease the equipment or insist on some sort of a trial period arrangement, for a fee, if necessary. It might(probably will) cost you a bit more, but when a salesman begins considering the markup on a $25K sale all sorts of novel notions become plausible. Especially so, if they see you looking in other directions.

If I was going to spend $25K on equipment, I'd consider finding a dealer or shop that would work with me in the event that I needed to return equipment and purchase something else from them in it's place. I have a friend that buys high end consumer and pro equipment and he seems to do quite well chatting up sales people and managers and getting them to let him have a trial on the more expensive equipment. I recall in particular that he got a rather lengthy trial on a slide scanner a while back. You certainly have NOTHING to lose by asking for a trial period or leasing arrangement. One of the advantages would be increased freedom to upgrade as technology marches on. Incidentally, he often gets very good deals on the items he ends up buying. There's no substitute for developing a relationship with the sales staff in a store environment where prices can be negotiable. You may not get rock bottom web prices, but who ever gets a trial on a web purchase?

The only other thing that comes to mind is do you really need a Kodak 8660 if you're not actually using it to submit your work?(which I'd guess would be sort of odd, anyhow?) I'm guessing that like most people who switch over you'd primarily be working with clients that could accept digital files directly and only be proofing on the printer? In that case, mightn't you be able to get along with an Epson 1270 inkjet or even a higher end model for considerably less money and doubtlessly lower supply costs?

At any rate, I wish you good luck. Perhaps you'll get some responses from people with experience with the equipment you mentioned. Either way, your own personal evaluation would be worth far more than anyone else's opinion since you best know the details of how the equipment's faults or plusses would apply to your own situation.

-- Gerald M. Payne (gmp@francomm.com), May 03, 2000.

Seth, I can't help you out with your equipment selection but I may be able to remove one of your percieved road blocks. You say that the Nikon 2000 will not work with a SCSI to USB converter. I am not surprised. But there is a far better solution in any event. Your G4 has 3 PCI slots for adding addtional hardware directly on the computer buss. Adaptec makes several SCSI controler cards ranging in price from about $100 to about $400 differing primarly in transfer speed. Most scanners require the slowest speed available (they are not very fast devices) so even the least expensive might work. Given your budget and looking to the future I would suggest one of the faster ones. In any event a SCSI buss installed in this manner will work just as if it were a part of the original computer hardware. So unless you have already dedicated the PCI slots to some other use I would suggest one of the Adaptec cards.

-- Bill Cook (billc@wcook.com), May 03, 2000.