Re: Which do YOU like better, Quickie or Lightning scan?

[spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector)]

In article df@adelaide.dialix.com.au (David Francis) writes...

>Mitchell Spector (spec@vax2.concordia.ca) wrote:
>:
>:     I cannot state it enough times, *stay away* from version 3.x of the
>: Quickie software. There is a day/night difference between it and older
>: versions, which did in fact do decent greyscale photo scans unlike any
>: of the newer releases.
>:
>:     My Quickie came with version 2.03 of the software. The only glitch
>: is the stand-alone application will not load under System 6.0.1, but
>: the NDA version works just fine. I really don't understand how on
>: earth 3.x was released, it is a downgrade, period.
>
>Thanks for your response Mitchell, and the advice. Any idea where I could
>get a copy of the version 2.03 NDA?:

    Currently there is no source. Joe Kohn has the distribution rights
for version 3.2 of the software package and right now, that is what he
will send you (for US$5) if you request the Quickie software. There is
a good chance Vitesse probably wouldn't mind him distributing an older
version, but he would need to check on that.

    If he can, I would suggest selling both disks, either combining the
two version on one disk (in separate folders, clearly marked of course)
or sell them independently.

>There is just one good thing I have to say about v3.0.2; it has a
>facility for adjusting the palette of the image after scanning, to look
>like sepia, or a kind of moon-glow, or a red, blue, or green tint. You
>can get some really attractive effects from it.

    You mean the filters? Yes, that was one feature about version 3.x
which actually is an upgrade and a useful feature (the reason I think
it should still be made available, but not for the actual scanning).

>:     The Quickie-C option never worked well (or at all it sounds like).
>: In short, I've never heard anyone report being successful with it or
>: the software that was bundled with the tray and filters. Pretty much
>: a flop, and yet another surprise that that was released.
>
>That's really disappointing - I was SO looking forward to scanning all my
>color photos!

    Unless someone has some advice on getting decent output from the
Quickie-C, your only real choice would be to have them scanned on at
a special service (or a friend with a PC or Mac with color scanner)
and then convert them into color images with Convert 3200. That is
not much of a solution, and quality would range from very good to
poor depending on each image.

>: As for Vitesse, they're no longer in the Apple
>: II business at all.
>
>I'm not at all surprised.

    Well other than the incident with the Quickie-C, Quickie 3.x and their
ill-fated FAXination program (hmmm, weren't these all written by the same
author incidentally?) they were a _very_ decent company. They brough the
Apple IIgs the Quickie scanner, Harmonie, Salvation Supreme and Ultima I.

>Maybe I should try getting some LightningScan (is that the name?) software.
>You did say it used the same scanner didn't you? Did they ever do a color
>scanning program?

    According to what I've heard, the software is locked into using the
specific controller card each company made, so that is no good unless
someone has patched or rewrote parts of the software (unlikely). There
was never a color option for the LightningScan GS.

>:     On the hardware side, switch the DPI setting to '4' (400 DPI) and
>: the photo/letter switch to one of the three photo settings. Then make
>: sure to adjust the thumb wheel, which varies from photo to photo.
>: Some photos come out better than others, it depends on the size and
>: detail of the image, not too mention the type of media your scanning.
>
>Agreed and understood. But I find the Light/Dark wheel has to be turned
>way way up even to scan a really bright photo.

    When I would scan photos, I'd usually push the wheel up past the
middle setting too. It varied on each image though, some require the
setting is lighter than others (probably glossy photos I would think,
since the light might have bounced off more. Or maybe it would have
the opposite effect). I just know from experience, you have to move
the wheel around a bit to get an optimum scan.

>: I've gotten some pretty good scans done with my Quickie. If I want any
>: color, I just export it into Photoshop on my PC and colorize it there
>: (that requires a lot of patience, but it's doable).
>
>What, you mean pixel by pixel !! Sheeesh.. I guess I could do it too, but
>it would probably take a few weeks to do each photo!

    Well actually, you can select off areas with a losso tool and then
play around with the color balance settings (adding mixtures of red,
green or blue to give a hue to objects). It's not a trivial task mind
you, but it can be done. I also tried it once in an Apple IIgs paint
program, replacing the greyscales with different shades of a color
(like a gold statue, which just requires hues of yellows and browns).
I usually do draw things pixel by pixel to get the nicest results (or
I should say did since it's been at least 4 years since I've drawn
graphics on my GS :/) but for a quick and dirty job, you can do some
colorizing how I mention above. 

Mitchell Spector
spec@vax2.concordia.ca