Re: Quickie Color Scanner

[Rich Hare <rhare@mich.com>]

I vaguely remember having one.
I THINK I made ONE reasonably passable color scan, after hours and hours
of trying.  (It looked OK if you took poetic license, squinted, and had
the wind at your back.)

I was concerned about the color filters getting scratched with use, and
the general serviceability of the whole thing.

I think initial pre-introduction orders offered a money-back guarantee.
I took advantage of the offer.



Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1] wrote:
> 
> Supertimer writes:
> >ladyphoenixxii@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> >>I just discovered that one of the Quickie scanners I have is for
> >>color.  It came with a scanner bed made of two sheets of glass which
> >>were broken beyond using.  The instructions say that the item to be
> >>scanned is supposed to be under both sheets of glass and not between.
> >>
> >>Does anyone know if this glass has special optical qualities and if so
> >>where can I buy replacement glass.
> >
> >I think it is just color glass.  From the Vitesse advertisements,
> >it seemed you were supposed to scan the same picture through
> >the different color sheets of glass and the color software would
> >then build a 3200 color graphic from it.
> 
> The glass was just clear on mine. The filters were colored red
> green and blue. The filters were colored plastic strips that fit
> under the scan bar, between the scan head and the glass.
> 
> You had to modify your Quickie scanner by taking it apart
> and attaching a cut (or was it stamped) metal plate that had
> holes that would attach to pegs on the top of the scan bar then
> reassemble the scan head. The scan bar had a flourescent
> light underneath that would illuminate the object you were
> scanning because the Quickie's led's in the scan head
> would not generate enough light to get through the filters.
> 
> The presence of the light under the scan bar lifted the
> scan head off of the object you would scan so the glass
> is just there to give the Quickie's rollers something to
> roll on. It is glass because it needs to be transparent. The
> second sheet of glass presses down on the object you
> are scanning to keep it from moving. Again, it is glass
> because it needs to be transparent. There is no optical
> qualities about it, per se.
> 
> The process was a bit involved. First you would
> calibrate the software/scan head combo using
> gray-scale with the green filter only. Once you got
> a good gray scale with the green you'd scan in
> color mode, first with red, then with green, then with
> blue (I think that was the color sequence). Each scan
> had to be EXACTLY like the first one. I had to scratch
> start and stop marks on mine so that I knew exactly
> where to start and stop scanning.
> 
> The three images (each a gray scale scan through
> a colored filter) would be combined by the software
> and calculations of what the colors should be were
> done. Also, because the frame lifted the scan
> head off the object the image would be skewed so
> the software would calculate and compensate for
> the skewiness.
> 
> I must have played with that thing for about 500 hours
> and could never get it to produce any color other than
> red. Steve McQueen and I could never get it to produce
> anything but red from my Quickie scan head. My
> conclusion was that the Quickie-C hardware was ready
> but the software was released prematurely. Because
> of the flack he was taking from FAXination at the time
> he stopped responding to emails and phone calls
> and I never did get mine to work.  I donated it to
> an Apple II hardware collector as an oddity when
> he bought the rest of my GS gear.  It was a very
> good idea that really was too premature, I don't
> know how many they sold but I'd guess it is pretty
> rare.
> 
> That's how I remember it, anyway.
> --
> Eric <chippys@earthSPAMlink.net>