A
Andy Hewitt
I just bought a new Epson CX3200. I was only actually needing a new
printer, but ended up with this. Operated on my iMac 400 with 576MB RAM,
and OS 10.3.2.
I'm not dissapointed either, it prints great pictures, and scans very
well indeed - far, far better than my old Umax 3400.
Now I used VueScan for the 3400, and it worked great. I tried it with
the Epson, and despite Ed's remarks on the web site that multi-function
units aren't supported, it does actually work.
I did a comparison with it against the EpsonScan software, to see what
differences there are. Indeed the EpsonScan software is pretty good,
possibly a little faster than VueScan.
However, I did a back to back test scan, using the same photo, and
leaving each app to default settings, and saved as jpg. The VueScan
image was might lighter, and the colours washed out. I tried again with
colour and fade restore enabled, but still the Epson scan is better.
I even tried it at 600dpi, and as TIFF files, all the same.
Any ideas here?
Cheers.
printer, but ended up with this. Operated on my iMac 400 with 576MB RAM,
and OS 10.3.2.
I'm not dissapointed either, it prints great pictures, and scans very
well indeed - far, far better than my old Umax 3400.
Now I used VueScan for the 3400, and it worked great. I tried it with
the Epson, and despite Ed's remarks on the web site that multi-function
units aren't supported, it does actually work.
I did a comparison with it against the EpsonScan software, to see what
differences there are. Indeed the EpsonScan software is pretty good,
possibly a little faster than VueScan.
However, I did a back to back test scan, using the same photo, and
leaving each app to default settings, and saved as jpg. The VueScan
image was might lighter, and the colours washed out. I tried again with
colour and fade restore enabled, but still the Epson scan is better.
I even tried it at 600dpi, and as TIFF files, all the same.
Any ideas here?
Cheers.