> Can anyone out there with a handy scanner tell me how well it works and what software supports it.
I'll start wit the software... The handyScanner comes with its own drawing program, which, IMO is one of the best drawing programs I have ever used, but it does take a little getting used to, and the manual isn't the best.
Note: I did say DRAWING program.. NOT a paint program.
The images created/saved are in a format unique to this drawing program, so it isn't doodle or koala compatible.. However, there is a GEOS utility that will take these drawings and convert them to GEOPaint (from there they can be converted to doodle, etc, if required). The scanner/drawing program creates images that take up about half an "A4" sized page... or about 4 "screens", which can be viewed by scrolling.. much the same way as GEOS.
As for the scanner itself, and how well it works, is a little trickier to answer.. I purchaced my handyscanner several years ago, when they were first produced.. the results I have had can only be described as excellent... however, in the last year or two I have read several reports from people that haven't been as impressed with them as I have, and I have finally figured out why. In the latest issue of Commodore World (issue#10) there is a review of the HandyScanner, as sold by CMD, that although favourable, doesn't seem to do them justice... Why ? Because from what I can determine, the actual scanner being sold is NOT the same as the scanner that I have. Why this is so I have no idea.. it may be that CMD are only buying the interface, and sourcing the scanner locallly (the scanner itself is an off-the-shelf IBM scanner), or it could be that the original scanners are no longer being produced.
In what way are the "new" scanners different, I hear you ask.. firstly, the new scanners have a 4 inch wide "window" - The original scanner has only a 2.5" "window".. now this may sound as though the new ones are better, and can produce wider scans, but this isn't the case.. it means that with the newer scanner, 1/2 of what you see never actually gets scanned.. among other things, this would make it more difficult to align multi-scanned images.
It also appears that the scanner options are different with the new scanners.. Apparently, they have a contrast setting, a text/photo setting, and a "4 position switch to give the user different scanning sizes to choose from"
The original scanners have a contrast knob, a brightness knob, a 4 position switch to set the DITHERING, and another switch to select between 8 dot/mm and 16dot/mm (200/400dpi). Contrary to what is written in Commodore World, the scanner WILL resolve an image at 400dpi, but it does so by enlarging the image by a factor of two, which results in a SCREEN image of 200dpi.. if you happen to have a printer capable of 400dpi (such as a laser), then reducing the output by a factor of 2 during the print process reproduces the original image at 400dpi. I must admit that I rarely use this option though.
I suspect that since the interface has been designed for the older type scanner, that the new scanners are leaving a lot to be desired.. To highlight this fact, one of the comments from Commodore World was "The worst result is probably from halftone pictures (used in newspapers, and some magazines), which look awful". With MY scanner, such images come out very well indeed... The scanner is sensitive enough to pick up each of the individual "dots" that make up the image (thus producing an almost exact copy), OR, by careful adjustment of the brightness/contrast settings, the image can be "filled in" so that black planes become totally black, yet the halftones are still resolved as a b/w dot pattern.
It does seem to be a shame that the handyscanners now being sold are not the same as the interface was designed for.. whether this is for cost reasons, or just a matter of availability, I do not know.. but it does highlight one important fact.. Not all scanners are created equal, and when people discuss the HandyScanner, it is wise to bear this fact in mind.
It was Scott Eggleston that wrote the CMD review, and reading between the lines of his article it seems that he is not overly impressed with it.. Me on the other hand, was impressed with mine from the day I got it... it has taken me all this time to discover why others haven't been as impressed with theirs as I have.. it is simply because a different scanner is now being used.
Hopefully this has been of some help to you.
Cheers, Rod
----------------------------------------
From : Gaelyne Moranec
To : Danny Rein
Subj : Handy Scanner
G'day Danny,
The Fun Graphics Machine supports the resulting Handyscanner files very nicely. I've had a lot of fun working with both Handyscanner and FGM. It's a nice combination.
Cheers, Gaelyne
----------------------
From : Jack Vanderwhite
To : Rod Gasson
Rod, I read your review here of Handyscanner as sold by CMD. Mine is an older one bought when RIO computers sold them in the USA. However, there is a note with it saying that the scanner itself hs been "upgraded to a newer version" so I don't think its CMD's doing. I am able to get better scans using my ARTEC scanner instead of the one supplied.
So, I would suggest that anyone buying the CMD one or having a scanner that is not satisfactory do a little experimenting.
BTW:From your comments I gather that you do not have the PAGEFOX cartridge. It allows you to hold twice the number of screens to make a standard US page in memory. Also the Handyfox is a much better draw program that needs both carts.
Also, I have a bunch of clip art disks that were sold by RIO here in the USA. It's obviously German clip art and the labels say it's from ART & WEISE, not from Scanntronik. Know anything about them? Excellent clip art. RIO is a long gone US firm that imported a bunch of things from Scanntronik and Datel. It was in Las Vegas, Nevada. Maybe too much of the firms money went to the casinos.
Jack VW
------------------------
From : Rod Gasson
To : Jack Vanderwhite
Subj : Handyscanner
Hi Jack,
JV> BTW: Rod, your concern about buying other scan heads aafter buying the Handyscan is sorta not a real problem.
Maybe not for you folk.
JV> Used older handscanners go for relatively few dollars here in the US. Compared to the $$$ for the handyscanner they are cheap. bout $30-35 US at 2nd hand computer stores and on BBSs.
Although the prices of new ones here are quite cheap (around $100-$150aust), there are surprisingly few second hand ones to be seen.. and most people tend to ask near new prices for them.
JV> Can anyone supply information on what scanner is supplied with the Handyscanner from CMD???
Best I can tell you is what is written in CW..it is a "primax 400 dpi", apparently that is what is printed on the topside anyway.
Cheers, Rod
--------------------------
From : Rod Gasson
To : Phil Heberer
Hi Phil,
RG> different scanner is now being used.
PH> I wasn't aware of this. The HandyScanner
Neither was I, until I saw the picture, and read the review in CW.
PH> *I* have is apparently the older one. It is a NCE model 900/SC (I just dug it out to look!<g>) This might
Same as mine... Serial# 120318
PH> also explain why I had BETTER results with the CBM scanner than I did with a LogiTech scanner on the clone when dealing with halftones!
Could be.
PH> Thanks for the info!
You're welcome... but actually it is/was for my own interest that I really mentioned it.. I figured that by opening it as a topic of discussion here would shine a bit more light on the matter.. it has :-)
Cheers, Rod
--------------------------------------
From : Jack Vanderwhite
To : Rod Gasson
Subj : Handyscanner
Interesting. That makes 3 different scanners that I know of. Your and Phil's originals. Mine, which is evidently the 2nd one is also an NEC but marked as art. # 31622... No other model #. The serial # on mine is 92000099 which I assume is the 99th one of 1992.
