Bob said:
I bought a Canon 8400F to scan photos and slides. From the reviews, I
thought I could turn out a pretty good copy.
Copying a 4X6 and printing it (Canon i850), the copy was mediocre. Not
sharp, colors were dull. Not being photo expert style critical, I'd
still call it just a "C". The difference is obvious, even at 5 feet
viewing distance.
First thought is my settings. Anyone care to tell me details about how
to set an 8400F to scan high quality photos? Computer literate,
scanner newbie. Scan time is not a factor. I think I know how to set
the i850 for maximum quality.
To get the most from the scanner, you need to set aside the printer for
the moment. Read through the pages at
www.scantips.com for lots of
useful and easy-to-follow advice on everyday scanning. Also look up
monitor calibration and color profiling. These get very expensive and
very complicated very quickly, but it's good to understand some of the
basic issues. There are several websites that offer monitor
calibration guides (not sure off hand, but I think Norman Koren was
one?), and there are a few free utilities such as Adobe Gamma out there
that you can use to make sure your monitor is showing you something
reasonably close to what the scanner is feeding it. If you're willing
to spend a couple of hundred dollars, there are some good hardware
profiling tools such as the OptixXR and the EyeOne Display 2 that can
do a better job than most human operators.
If the monitor is accurate and the image looked correct in the scanner
preview, it should also look correct in your image editor. If it
doesn't, two things come to mind. If "color management" means nothing
to you, make sure the Canon driver is set to output sRGB color.
Anything else will look desaturated in a non-color-managed application.
Or, if you're aware of color management issues, make sure your image
editor is using the same color space as your scanner driver (i.e., sRGB
or AdobeRGB). Second, make sure your scanner output is adjusted to
gamma 2.2. This would probably be an option tucked away somewhere;
it's *not* the graypoint setting on the histogram or a "gamma" slider
alongside other adjustment controls. The most likely "unwanted" gamma
setting of 1.0 will result in an extremely dark image, so it's very
unlikely your problem is with gamma values.
I'm not a Canon owner, so that's all I can offer.
Second is my printer. Should I upgrade my Canon i850 to a 4200? I'm
using Canon photo paper pro.
If the image looks right on your monitor and you know your monitor to
be accurate, the desaturation must be coming from your printer. I
don't know where the i850 falls on the quality scale, so the following
advice may or may not be easy to implement.
Look up color management when you have the time. Without explicit
instructions, the printer driver has to guess at what colors the RGB
numbers it's receiving actually represent. If the original image is
sRGB, the guess should be pretty close; otherwise, the colors and
contrast could end up way off. Moreover, the type of paper and your
own printer's unique output characteristics will further complicate the
task of matching paper to screen. *If* your screen is properly
calibrated and profiled, *if* you send sRGB data to the printer, and
*if* the printer is correctly configured to use your selected paper
type, you should get something pretty close to what's on your screen.
Otherwise, you'll need to tweak the printer driver settings to match
your expected output, or track down color profiles created for your
printer/paper/ink combination (sometimes readily available, and should
get you closer to the original than the unprofiled sRGB gamble), or
invest in a hardware printer profiling system (many $100s and most
likely overkill for you). The first option is the easiest; the second
is the best balance of cost (often free) and consistency but requires
more effort from the user as well as software (whatever you print from
*and* your printer driver) that supports color management. Such
"generic" profiles can't be tweaked easily by us novices, either; if
they're too flat or dark, we have to compensate and proof in the image
editor. Of course, if you can predict your printer's output from your
screen, it doesn't really matter whether either the printer or the
monitor is accurate--you can always adjust the image to compensate for
the printer's drawbacks and *then* print it.
Third is that the scanner could be defective? Not likely.
It's always possible, but rule out monitor calibration and printer
color matching first.
Next, how do I set the scanner to just scan a 4X6, not the whole
platen? If I try to do this simply, it scans the middle of the platen,
where it is not easy to set a picture squarely. I can place the
picture better using the bottom edge to get it square, but then I can't
get the scanner to scan 4X6 there.
Maybe there's an "advanced" mode, like on my Epson. You'll need a mode
that allows you to select or crop any given area on the
screen...telling it "4x6" most likely bypasses any such controls.
You'll need a Canon user to help you here.
Finally, I don't seem to see any options about saving various format
files or setting a save quality level. Just saves a jpg. Am I missing
something?
Same as above. Look for an "advanced" or "custom" or "professional"
mode, perhaps even a separate piece of software in the Start menu.
Sorry I can't offer more.
Thanks for your time and expertise. Canon's manual is really bad. Not
remotely enough detail.
If the software turns out to lack any such controls, look into whether
Vuescan or Silverfast support the scanner. Both will be a bit
cumbersome to learn, but both offer all the controls you need and then
some.
false_dmitrii
