PSA: 11 x 17" OA-Size Scanner On Sale for $149.99
4 4

101 posts in this topic

529 posts
15 hours ago, delekkerste said:

When you say you scanned some art for some Marvel Masterworks, do you mean that you scanned some of the art you own to be included in the "extras" section of the book(s)?  If so, I'm curious - did Marvel comp you a published copy when it/they came out?  I scanned some art that I was told would be used in one of the Omnibus editions that came out last year; a comp copy was neither offered nor asked for, though, it would have been nice to see how it turned out and how the art was presented in the book in the end, even if it was just in e-mailed JPEG or PDF form.     

As an FYI, years ago when I sent in a page to Marvel from the unpublished Perez Avengers vs JLA series to be scanned and included in the omnibus compendium version they were doing, Marvel sent me a free copy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,220 posts
39 minutes ago, Ironmandrd said:

As an FYI, years ago when I sent in a page to Marvel from the unpublished Perez Avengers vs JLA series to be scanned and included in the omnibus compendium version they were doing, Marvel sent me a free copy.

I provided page for Miracleman and they sent me a copy too (these were floppies, not TPBs or omnibus)

 

Malvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,088 posts
18 hours ago, delekkerste said:

When you say you scanned some art for some Marvel Masterworks, do you mean that you scanned some of the art you own to be included in the "extras" section of the book(s)?  If so, I'm curious - did Marvel comp you a published copy when it/they came out?  I scanned some art that I was told would be used in one of the Omnibus editions that came out last year; a comp copy was neither offered nor asked for, though, it would have been nice to see how it turned out and how the art was presented in the book in the end, even if it was just in e-mailed JPEG or PDF form.     

This was more than 10 years ago, and I provided scans for an X-men and Doctor Strange Masterwork (22 pages in total) not just for extras, but for the reconstruction and re-coloring because they didn’t have stats.  They were pretty upfront about not supplying comps then, but giving a shoutout in the credits (which they did) it appears that since then others have gotten comps, but they are flush with Mouse money now, unlike the early 2000s. :flipbait:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
458 posts

Over the past several months, I provided scans of three complete issues I own for upcoming Marvel Masterworks volumes.  When I asked, I was told they don't provide comp copies.  I was still happy enough to help the editor create a high-quality book.  Best, Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,757 posts
11 minutes ago, Lee B. said:

Over the past several months, I provided scans of three complete issues I own for upcoming Marvel Masterworks volumes.  When I asked, I was told they don't provide comp copies.  I was still happy enough to help the editor create a high-quality book.  Best, Lee

Wow. Three complete issues. They comp every guy that gets a credit anywhere just about anything with a Marvel logo on it...but not you. You are gracious. I try to be but I might have just gathered up my toys and gone home in the face of that obvious bullsheep. The editor should have opened his wallet and bought them himself, if nothing else, as a personal thank you for helping the line fleece us all again into buying the same old comics in yet another format ;) Ya know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
458 posts

It's too bad the Masterworks volumes are so expensive.  Hopefully I'll find the books on sale somewhere if I wait long enough.  The editor is a nice guy, and I had the time, so I was happy to share my toys.  I am expecting a credit in the books, at the very least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
901 posts
On ‎1‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 10:12 AM, The Voord said:

Thanks for the heads-up, Gene.  I checked Amazon UK this morning and they have this available at about £135 with p&p (which equates to about $175).  Placed an order . . .

Arrived this morning!  I'm off out this afternoon sampling Guinness in Liverpool.  If I'm in a fit state Friday I'll unwrap and install . . .

Scanner.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
901 posts

Okay, I installed this this afternoon - which was a fairly straightforward process.  Problem I experienced when scanning was that all my images were being cropped to about 11" x 8".  Did an internet search to determine what I was doing wrong and came across a Q&A post where someone else had come across this problem.  The solution was to opt for 'Detect Photos' on Page size and to opt for 'Flatbed' on Source.  Problem solved!  Currently going through the process of upgrading my CAF images and I'm really pleased with the results so far!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,716 posts
1 hour ago, The Voord said:

Okay, I installed this this afternoon - which was a fairly straightforward process.  Problem I experienced when scanning was that all my images were being cropped to about 11" x 8".  Did an internet search to determine what I was doing wrong and came across a Q&A post where someone else had come across this problem.  The solution was to opt for 'Detect Photos' on Page size and to opt for 'Flatbed' on Source.  Problem solved!  Currently going through the process of upgrading my CAF images and I'm really pleased with the results so far!

(thumbsu

Took me about 10 min. to figure out how to save to .TIF files for the scans I made for IDW, but, everything else has been pretty straightforward. 

I've been replacing a lot of my old cell phone photos with crisp, new scans over the past few days - I've been scanning at 300 dpi and saving in JPEG format, which usually results in about a 3.5MB file, but, somehow gets expanded to about 9MB after I crop it (not sure exactly why that is), which is what I've been uploading to CAF.  For an idea of scan quality, people can look at my CAF gallery - among the new scans up are the covers to X-Men #172 (P. Smith) & 176 (JRJR), Red Sonja v. 3 #3 (Wilshire), ASM #98 (Kane), Judge Dredd #22 (Bolland),  Nightside #1 (Derenick), two interiors from X-Men #213 (A. Davis) and a lot more.  

There's a lot more coming, including the complete G.I. Joe #21 story which I hope to upload in the near future for the first time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
151 posts

There was a delay in my order, but it arrived Thursday.   It was indeed a little larger than I had thought (delekkerste those paintings are HUGE)!  I had the crop issue as well, even when specifying 11 x 17, but a quick full function upload and selecting 'entire glass' solved that.  I saved those setting for everyday scan and now it's auto.  This things scanning is fast, 3 times faster for same dpi than my old HP scanner.  My previous all in one is currently in the corner, rocking back and forth, leaking what I can only hope is yellow (with a hint of cyan) ink, repeatedly printing something along the lines of 'All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy'...hmmm...think I'll be getting rid of that one.  THANKS again for the heads up, and I sincerely hope this is a sign of things to come for the year!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,356 posts
2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

(thumbsu

Took me about 10 min. to figure out how to save to .TIF files for the scans I made for IDW, but, everything else has been pretty straightforward. 

I've been replacing a lot of my old cell phone photos with crisp, new scans over the past few days - I've been scanning at 300 dpi and saving in JPEG format, which usually results in about a 3.5MB file, but, somehow gets expanded to about 9MB after I crop it (not sure exactly why that is), which is what I've been uploading to CAF.  For an idea of scan quality, people can look at my CAF gallery - among the new scans up are the covers to X-Men #172 (P. Smith) & 176 (JRJR), Red Sonja v. 3 #3 (Wilshire), ASM #98 (Kane), Judge Dredd #22 (Bolland),  Nightside #1 (Derenick), two interiors from X-Men #213 (A. Davis) and a lot more.  

There's a lot more coming, including the complete G.I. Joe #21 story which I hope to upload in the near future for the first time. 

I need someone more technically astute than me to confirm this, but doesn't dpi really only matter when it comes to print?  As long as you scan and upload the image at full size (say 11x17 and whatever the corresponding pixel ratio is), you can scan or save your scan at 72dpi or 100dpi and have far smaller files (and less time to actually scan) without any loss of quality apparent on your computer screen.  Do I have that right techies?  Again, for print, especially something like Artists editions, you need to scan at a full 300-600dpi and save as a tiff, not a jpeg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,144 posts
2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Took me about 10 min. to figure out how to save to .TIF files for the scans I made for IDW, but, everything else has been pretty straightforward. 

I was just wondering why you don't save them as pdf's. I thought they came out really well and are pretty compact. Out of curiosity, I then re-printed copies of one piece on ledger paper at 300 dpi and 600 dpi, and they were essentially indistinguishable with each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,757 posts
12 minutes ago, stinkininkin said:

I need someone more technically astute than me to confirm this, but doesn't dpi really only matter when it comes to print?  As long as you scan and upload the image at full size (say 11x17 and whatever the corresponding pixel ratio is), you can scan or save your scan at 72dpi or 100dpi and have far smaller files (and less time to actually scan) without any loss of quality apparent on your computer screen.  Do I have that right techies?  Again, for print, especially something like Artists editions, you need to scan at a full 300-600dpi and save as a tiff, not a jpeg.

Correct Scott. Web is 72 dpi. If you scan at 11x17 @ 144, you will end up with an image that displays at 22x34.  You can play with the ratios for whatever equation you're working with, as long as you understand browser settings are and will remain @ 72 dpi. It's only the display "size" that will be moving up or down. People fall all over themselves thinking about this, the possibilities of drum scanning originals at 50,000 dpi (for banner graphics over the Golden Gate Bridge?!) but I lean toward, "if it's bigger than my screen, it's a pita to view." Your mileage may vary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,716 posts
3 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

I need someone more technically astute than me to confirm this, but doesn't dpi really only matter when it comes to print?  As long as you scan and upload the image at full size (say 11x17 and whatever the corresponding pixel ratio is), you can scan or save your scan at 72dpi or 100dpi and have far smaller files (and less time to actually scan) without any loss of quality apparent on your computer screen.  Do I have that right techies?  Again, for print, especially something like Artists editions, you need to scan at a full 300-600dpi and save as a tiff, not a jpeg.

 

3 hours ago, vodou said:

Correct Scott. Web is 72 dpi. If you scan at 11x17 @ 144, you will end up with an image that displays at 22x34.  You can play with the ratios for whatever equation you're working with, as long as you understand browser settings are and will remain @ 72 dpi. It's only the display "size" that will be moving up or down. People fall all over themselves thinking about this, the possibilities of drum scanning originals at 50,000 dpi (for banner graphics over the Golden Gate Bridge?!) but I lean toward, "if it's bigger than my screen, it's a pita to view." Your mileage may vary.

I don't know about you guys, but, I blow up scans to greater than actual size on my screen all the time to look at certain areas of art (to better examine how the artist drew something, to better examine the condition of the art, to look for pencil marks, etc., just to name a few reasons).  As such, for myself, I prefer to keep higher-resolution/larger size file sizes saved (and, since CAF will accept those file sizes, there's no need to create separate, smaller files).  Even those Heritage scans (usually in the 1-1.5 MB range) often start to pixelate before I can see what I'm searching for.  

As a test, I uploaded 300 dpi (6.6MB) and 100 dpi (899KB) scans of the Mike Mignola Rocket Raccoon #2 cover to CAF:

Rocket Raccoon cover w/300 dpi scan

Rocket Raccoon cover w/100 dpi scan

If you save the JPEGs off of CAF, you'll see that CAF compressed the 300 dpi scan to 1.8MB from 6.6MB, while the 100 dpi scan somehow got slightly enlarged to 1.1MB.  On screen, it doesn't make any difference, as vodou noted; if you save them and then blow them up, there's a bit of an advantage to having the larger scan, though, certainly not as great as if you had the original uncompressed JPEG, which makes a huge difference when you really blow it up to examine the art closely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,716 posts
3 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I was just wondering why you don't save them as pdf's. I thought they came out really well and are pretty compact. Out of curiosity, I then re-printed copies of one piece on ledger paper at 300 dpi and 600 dpi, and they were essentially indistinguishable with each other.

I'm sure PDFs work fine if your only goals are to save the images and print them.  But, for uploading to CAF, printing for publication, copying/pasting into documents or applications, hosting them online, etc., you're going to need to save as image files, no?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
901 posts

I replaced all my CAF images of my 'same size' Frank Hampson DAN DARE originals (illustrated at exactly the same size of the printed page of 12" x 9.5") and was impressed with the results which managed to stay faithful to the delicacy of line and colour work (the previous images I'd uploaded, stitched-together in photo-shop using an A4 scanner, never really captured the quality of the artwork).

Here's a link to a replacement example, using the recommended (affordable) scanner Gene alerted us to:

http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=616384

Remember to click-onto the larger available image to fully-benefit the fine detail.

Guess I'm going to be busy this coming week with replacement scans for my CAF galleries!

Edited by The Voord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,144 posts
1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

I'm sure PDFs work fine if your only goals are to save the images and print them.  But, for uploading to CAF, printing for publication, copying/pasting into documents or applications, hosting them online, etc., you're going to need to save as image files, no?  

I don’t see why. I send newsletters I do to my professional printer, and he wants them. They are certainly a lot easier to use than EPS. CAF doesn’t allow uploads of PDFs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,355 posts

If you want to send a scan for press purposes, scan it to a 600 dpi TIFF or PSD. That way, the publisher will have enough resolution that they can blow it up for a detail view, if they want.

If you want to scan for your own records, scan it to a 300 dpi JPG with Max Quality (12 setting in Photoshop). Yes, this is lossy JPG compression, but it is cranked so high it won't be discernible from a lossless TIFF and you will save some file space.

Then, take this high-res JPG and resize it down to a 150dpi JPG to upload to CAF, etc. This will still be large enough that people can open it up to 2x-4x zoom to inspect details on it (depending on their monitor size.) You can use about an 8-10 setting in the JPG quality in Photoshop.

Don't save it as a PDF. Unless you know what you are doing with the PDF image compression, you will be mashing it down with lesser-quality JPG settings inside the PDF.

If you don't care about file space, scan it at a 600 dpi TIFF or PSD, and then save a web-display copy at the aforementioned 150 dpi JPG.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,088 posts
16 hours ago, vodou said:

Correct Scott. Web is 72 dpi. If you scan at 11x17 @ 144, you will end up with an image that displays at 22x34.  You can play with the ratios for whatever equation you're working with, as long as you understand browser settings are and will remain @ 72 dpi. It's only the display "size" that will be moving up or down. People fall all over themselves thinking about this, the possibilities of drum scanning originals at 50,000 dpi (for banner graphics over the Golden Gate Bridge?!) but I lean toward, "if it's bigger than my screen, it's a pita to view." Your mileage may vary.

I used to be a drum scanner operator, and I think the largest I ever scanned were 8x10 transparencies for a Levi's billboard.  Bear in mind that the effective DPI of a billboard is about 30DPI.  It doesn't need to be that high, because you aren't going to stand six inches from it.  It's going to be six stories above you and 6 blocks aways.  This was back in the day when a 16GB drive cost 2K.  The files for this were pushing 700MB. Now, I wouldn't even blink at files that size.

There's been good advice here, and I posted some upthread about how to scan and what resolution to use- but the simplest thing is- from a setting perspective in the scanner:  100% at 600 DPI and save as a TIF.  Then open that TIF and save as a jpeg. The JPG is for CAF, and the original TIF is your hi-rez print quality copy. (you can use LZW compression in the TIF, that's lossless) Set to Color, don't ever scan as Line art, EVER. just pretend that setting isn't even there.

I haven't set up the scanner we all ran out and bought yet- been too busy, but once I do, I'll upload a pic of my settings and I'll point out a few things in the menu. There may be some unsharp masking settings to considered, but I gotta see what it does first.

Edited by MYNAMEISLEGION

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
172 posts

I bought one yesterday from my local Staples here in Toronto (for a whopping $189 CDN lol)...and after a few hours of use thus far I have to say I am absolutely blown away. Not only was it a steal of a deal even on this side of the border, it performs like a dream. So easy to set-up and use, very intuitive, quick, and most importantly produces some of the best quality scans and prints I have ever seen. The only obvious down-side is the size as it is a beast, but if you have the space it is all good.

Many thanks Gene!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4