Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #8685 > unrolled thread

Scanner software for Mac

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Contents

  Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-03-27 11:59 +0200
    Re: Scanner software for Mac Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 07:57 -0400
      Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-03-27 14:31 +0200
        Re: Scanner software for Mac gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2012-03-27 07:20 -0700
          Re: Scanner software for Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-03-28 05:28 +1300
            Re: Scanner software for Mac Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2012-03-27 12:52 -0400
              Re: Scanner software for Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-03-28 06:42 +1300
                Re: Scanner software for Mac Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 14:44 -0400
                  Re: Scanner software for Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-03-28 08:17 +1300
                    Re: Scanner software for Mac gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2012-03-27 13:04 -0700
                  Re: Scanner software for Mac Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2012-03-27 21:01 +0000
                    Re: Scanner software for Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-03-29 02:28 +1300
                      Re: Scanner software for Mac Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2012-03-28 09:59 -0400
                        Re: Scanner software for Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-03-29 05:16 +1300
                      Re: Scanner software for Mac Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2012-03-28 11:00 -0400
                        Re: Scanner software for Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-03-29 05:16 +1300
                Re: Scanner software for Mac Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2012-03-30 23:40 -0400
              Re: Scanner software for Mac dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-03-28 10:16 +1100
          Re: Scanner software for Mac Ed Anson <EdAnson@comcast.net> - 2012-03-27 18:07 -0400
            Re: Scanner software for Mac gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2012-03-27 15:14 -0700
            Re: Scanner software for Mac Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-03-27 22:40 -0400
        Re: Scanner software for Mac isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2012-03-27 10:09 -0700
          Re: Scanner software for Mac dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-03-28 10:26 +1100
          Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-01 15:08 +0200
            Re: Scanner software for Mac Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2012-04-01 20:29 +0000
              Re: Scanner software for Mac isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2012-04-01 23:15 -0700
                Re: Scanner software for Mac "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2012-04-02 17:45 +0000
                  Re: Scanner software for Mac Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2012-04-03 19:55 +0000
                    Re: Scanner software for Mac Michael Siemon <mlsiemon@sonic.net> - 2012-04-03 15:14 -0700
            Re: Scanner software for Mac isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2012-04-01 22:41 -0700
              Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-02 19:42 +0200
        Re: Scanner software for Mac Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-03-27 22:11 -0400
          Re: Scanner software for Mac dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-03-28 14:20 +1100
            Re: Scanner software for Mac Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-03-28 20:56 -0400
        Re: Scanner software for Mac "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2012-04-02 17:21 +0000
          Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-02 19:50 +0200
            Re: Scanner software for Mac "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2012-04-04 02:11 +0000
              Re: Scanner software for Mac dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-04 13:37 +1000
                Re: Scanner software for Mac isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2012-04-03 21:01 -0700
                  Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-05 15:50 +0200
                    Re: Scanner software for Mac isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2012-04-05 21:23 -0700
                      Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-08 10:15 +0200
              Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-05 08:51 +0200
    Re: Scanner software for Mac Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-03-27 22:00 -0400
      Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-01 15:09 +0200
        Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-04-01 16:14 +0200
        Re: Scanner software for Mac Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-04-02 00:57 -0400
          Re: Scanner software for Mac Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> - 2012-04-02 19:35 +0200
    Re: Scanner software for Mac Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2012-03-28 22:03 +0100
      Re: Scanner software for Mac Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2012-03-28 16:26 -0700
        Re: Scanner software for Mac Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2012-03-30 00:22 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#8685 — Scanner software for Mac

Hi,

... I know, this is an often asked question, so I will ask it again 
because there seems to be no useful answer:

Is there any useful scanner software for the Mac (Lion)?

I found and tried this so far:

a) Image Caputure: Easy to use because of its simplicity, nice scans 
but unusable due to the user interface (most of all missing 
magnification of the preview), especially useless for scanning 
negatives. :-(

b) VueScan: Yes, I not only tried but also registered it. It has some 
very good features and some very bad traits. After so many years of 
development, I don't see how that is going to change. So, amongst all 
it's good features, it still leaves much to be wished for. And I can't 
wait another 10 years to finally start scanning...

c) SilverFast: Hmm, this may be a good software but there's no working 
Lion version with my scanner (CanoScan 5600F). So it's impossible to 
try. In fact, there currently seems to be very limited SilverFast 
editions for the Mac, which is sad. I wonder, why there has to be a 
version tied to every single piece of individual scanner hardware on 
earth anyway.

d) Canon MPNavigator: Once tried, second try it crashed irrevocably. 
It's complete crap, like most vendor specific software. I can't even 
launch it anymore. I tried to remove and reinstall (incl. its scanner 
drivers), but to no avail. It just keeps crashing for some unkown 
reason. So, a definitive no-go here.

If anyone has an idea of what scanner software is best (also for 
scanning negative films) AND works with my CanoScan 5600F then please, 
please let me know. Thanks very much in advance.
-- 
cul8er

Paul
paul.foerster@gmx.net

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8686

In article <9tdhcpFtthU1@mid.individual.net>,
 Paul Förster <paul.foerster@gmx.net> wrote:

> b) VueScan: Yes, I not only tried but also registered it. It has some 
> very good features and some very bad traits. After so many years of 
> development, I don't see how that is going to change. So, amongst all 
> it's good features, it still leaves much to be wished for. And I can't 
> wait another 10 years to finally start scanning...

Care to elaborate? We've been using VueScan for a good ten years; we've 
scanned (literally) over a thousand images, prints, negatives, slides, 
documents and whatnot.  We don't even use particularly good scanners 
(Canon 8400F at the moment). Granted, VueScan is a bit quirky to set up 
(or rather, to understand how to set up), but once you do, it does what 
it's supposed to do.  

Anyway, it's about as good as you're going to get without spending a 
bunch of money. You could Google for Iris Powerscan. I've never used it, 
but I'm told it's very good.
-- 

... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8687

Hi Warren,

> Care to elaborate? We've been using VueScan for a good ten years; we've
> scanned (literally) over a thousand images, prints, negatives, slides,
> documents and whatnot.  We don't even use particularly good scanners
> (Canon 8400F at the moment). Granted, VueScan is a bit quirky to set up
> (or rather, to understand how to set up), but once you do, it does what
> it's supposed to do.
> 
> Anyway, it's about as good as you're going to get without spending a
> bunch of money. You could Google for Iris Powerscan. I've never used it,
> but I'm told it's very good.

... I'm not worried about spending money. I registered VueScan and 
payed the price as I do for any other piece of software I use.

The story is this: I'm currently in the process of digitizing the whole 
family image archive. That includes 110 format negatives, the most 
crappy Polaroid instant photo shit, 60x60 negatives (two half-scans 
necessary because of physical constraints of the lamp), 35 mm films 
which are everything else than flat and all such stuff. Many negatives 
date back to the 1960s and some are even older. You can imagine the 
quality...

Anyway, I have a long list of things I would wish VueScan had. It's not 
its image correction features, though there are some points as well, 
it's more user interface stuff, loads of small things that make using 
handling VueScan's interface by far less effective as it could be.

Examples:

The save, print, Rotate and magnifier buttons don't belong in the lower 
right corner. Moving the mouse there is way too long, i.e. all 
essential controls are seperated too much.

The selection frame should have an inner marking that shows where to 
move the mouse to turn it to the hand allowing to move the whole frame.

The selection frame's area should be clearly defined. I found that the 
upper and left lines of the frame seem to include the scanned area 
while the right and lower edges don't. The whole frame should either 
completely surround the scanning area or are part of it but not both.

Considering the state of the negatives, I can't just lock the *exact* 
image colors, exposure, etc. Even if I calibrate the negative base 
colors I get different results. Interestingly, if you tick for example 
color correction on one image frame, then it shows a beautiful image 
for one negative strip. Then, move the selection frame to the next 
image on that same strip and all is lost, though the both images look 
beautiful with the frame positioned around the first image. I know, 
things like fading and color correction have to evaluate an image and 
determin certain values based on that evaluation. Of course, that 
evaluation naturally different for each and every picture. What I would 
like is a features that allows applying the exact image properties of 
scanning one image to another.

Btw., VueScan likes to happily reset all its settings between restarts 
from time to time, a "feature" I absolutely hate!

Back to the UI stuff: I think, the Prefs pane should be a Preferences 
menu, like it's standard on a Mac. For the Windows version, it should 
consequently be moved to a menu Tools/Options or something like that. 
Also, temporary settings like file names, etc. should be separated from 
permanent ones like use a temp file and that sort.

etc., etc., etc.

The list is really long, believe me. And I guess it's better not to 
swamp Ed with such a long list because I figure he'd refuse to 
implement any wish at all then. :-(
-- 
cul8er

Paul
paul.foerster@gmx.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8688

On 2012-03-27 12:31:08 +0000, Paul Förster said:

> The story is this: I'm currently in the process of digitizing the whole 
> family image archive.

I did the same a number of years ago with a cheap Cano scanner that no 
longer works under Lion.  I used their software.  If their software 
won't work for you, I'd contact Canon.  I remember during one system 
upgrade prior to Lion the software pooped out, I contacted them, they 
told me something to delete it worked fine from that point on.

> The save, print, Rotate and magnifier buttons don't belong in the lower 
> right corner. Moving the mouse there is way too long, i.e. all 
> essential controls are seperated too much.
> 
> The selection frame should have an inner marking that shows where to 
> move the mouse to turn it to the hand allowing to move the whole frame.

[snip]

I only used the scanner for scanning, and did all this other stuff with 
GraphicConverter after the fact. It never occured to me that the 
scanning software would be expected to do all these other jobs as well.
-- 
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us 
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. 
-- Galileo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8690

gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:

> On 2012-03-27 12:31:08 +0000, Paul Förster said:
> 
> > The story is this: I'm currently in the process of digitizing the whole
> > family image archive.
> 
> I did the same a number of years ago with a cheap Cano scanner that no
> longer works under Lion.  I used their software.  If their software 
> won't work for you, I'd contact Canon.  I remember during one system 
> upgrade prior to Lion the software pooped out, I contacted them, they
> told me something to delete it worked fine from that point on.
> 
> > The save, print, Rotate and magnifier buttons don't belong in the lower
> > right corner. Moving the mouse there is way too long, i.e. all 
> > essential controls are seperated too much.
> > 
> > The selection frame should have an inner marking that shows where to
> > move the mouse to turn it to the hand allowing to move the whole frame.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> I only used the scanner for scanning, and did all this other stuff with
> GraphicConverter after the fact. It never occured to me that the 
> scanning software would be expected to do all these other jobs as well.

Aye, I'd not bother trying to do image editing in your scanner app -
I've never found one with decent tools. However GraphicConverter is
excellent for this purpose. Every serious Mac user should own a copy,
unless you already have Photoshop, perhaps - but even then GC is so
quick, easy and inexpensive for edits and of conversion into other
formats, I've hardly ever used more serious image editing apps even when
they've been available :-)
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8691

In article <1khniyl.1gd0u0k1ok4mjwN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
 jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:

> Aye, I'd not bother trying to do image editing in your scanner app -
> I've never found one with decent tools. However GraphicConverter is
> excellent for this purpose. Every serious Mac user should own a copy,
> unless you already have Photoshop, perhaps - but even then GC is so
> quick, easy and inexpensive for edits and of conversion into other
> formats, I've hardly ever used more serious image editing apps even when
> they've been available :-)
> -- 

But I've used less sophisticated tools like iPhoto, for reducing 
resolution for like email. Seems like reducing resolution is a lost 
feature, IIRC it used to be in GC, but no longer is. I suppose iPhoto 
is just easier to use.

-- 
This space unintentionally left blank.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8694

Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:

> In article <1khniyl.1gd0u0k1ok4mjwN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
> > Aye, I'd not bother trying to do image editing in your scanner app -
> > I've never found one with decent tools. However GraphicConverter is
> > excellent for this purpose. Every serious Mac user should own a copy,
> > unless you already have Photoshop, perhaps - but even then GC is so
> > quick, easy and inexpensive for edits and of conversion into other
> > formats, I've hardly ever used more serious image editing apps even when
> > they've been available :-)
> > -- 
> 
> But I've used less sophisticated tools like iPhoto, for reducing 
> resolution for like email. Seems like reducing resolution is a lost 
> feature, IIRC it used to be in GC, but no longer is. I suppose iPhoto
> is just easier to use.

You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
(depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
Options in the Save As… dialog.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8696

In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
 jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:

> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
> Options in the Save As… dialog.

I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's 
actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke 
isn't about to remove features, is he?
-- 

... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8697

Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
> > You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
> > need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
> > if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
> > (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
> > Options in the Save As… dialog.
> 
> I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's 
> actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke
> isn't about to remove features, is he?

What I thought. It would be beyond nuts to remove these features,
especially as scaling and save to a set file size are used so often.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8699

On 2012-03-27 19:17:43 +0000, Jamie Kahn Genet said:

> Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>> jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
>> 
>>> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
>>> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
>>> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
>>> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
>>> Options in the Save As… dialog.
>> 
>> I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's
>> actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke
>> isn't about to remove features, is he?
> 
> What I thought. It would be beyond nuts to remove these features,
> especially as scaling and save to a set file size are used so often.

I love GC dearly, but in the most recent version(s) or who knows maybe 
it's Lion's "aid", the thing has become incredibly slow in making 
simple crops and things.  If I could put other problems out of my 
misery I would turn my attention back to it.
-- 
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us 
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. 
-- Galileo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8700

Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
>> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
>> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
>> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
>> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
>> Options in the Save As… dialog.
> 
> I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's 
> actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke 
> isn't about to remove features, is he?

GC is one of the VERY few programs that has not dropped features with
upgrades!

-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8715

Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> wrote:

> Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> >  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> > 
> >> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
> >> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
> >> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
> >> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
> >> Options in the Save As� dialog.
> > 
> > I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's 
> > actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke
> > isn't about to remove features, is he?
> 
> GC is one of the VERY few programs that has not dropped features with
> upgrades!

I was just looking through the advanced prefs at the graphic formats
supported (FYI - not all are enabled by default), and there are a LOT.
Somehow it's reassuring in 2012 I still have access to old esoteric
formats like Startup Screen and ppat :-)

Bonus points to anyone able to tell me what ppat is. No cheating with
Google! :-D
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8716

In article <1khp582.h42c9lyktl0zN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
 jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:

> Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> wrote:
> 
> > Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> > >  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> > > 
> > >> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
> > >> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
> > >> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
> > >> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
> > >> Options in the Save Asโค? dialog.
> > > 
> > > I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's 
> > > actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke
> > > isn't about to remove features, is he?
> > 
> > GC is one of the VERY few programs that has not dropped features with
> > upgrades!
> 
> I was just looking through the advanced prefs at the graphic formats
> supported (FYI - not all are enabled by default), and there are a LOT.
> Somehow it's reassuring in 2012 I still have access to old esoteric
> formats like Startup Screen and ppat :-)
> 
> Bonus points to anyone able to tell me what ppat is. No cheating with
> Google! :-D

Heh. I can't even find it on Google. 

One of the great things about GC from its early days (I think it goes 
back to System 6 or even earlier) was that Mr. Lemke wanted it to be 
able to convert _any_ graphic format to any other, and he invited you to 
find obscure ones for him to add to the list. It's all still there, too. 
I mean, really, TRS-80?
-- 

... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8720

Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1khp582.h42c9lyktl0zN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
> > Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> wrote:
> > 
> > > Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> > > >  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
> > > >> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
> > > >> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
> > > >> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
> > > >> Options in the Save As� dialog.
> > > > 
> > > > I use GC 7.6.2 and it has a fine set of sizing/scaling tools. It's
> > > > actually a bit more intuitive than Photoshop. I mean c'mon, Herr Lemke
> > > > isn't about to remove features, is he?
> > > 
> > > GC is one of the VERY few programs that has not dropped features with
> > > upgrades!
> > 
> > I was just looking through the advanced prefs at the graphic formats
> > supported (FYI - not all are enabled by default), and there are a LOT.
> > Somehow it's reassuring in 2012 I still have access to old esoteric
> > formats like Startup Screen and ppat :-)
> > 
> > Bonus points to anyone able to tell me what ppat is. No cheating with
> > Google! :-D
> 
> Heh. I can't even find it on Google. 

Wow, you're right - it's not there in any of the top results - ha! It's
the pattern resource - 16 by 16 pixels used for the desktop pattern on
Macs, back when they used patterns instead of, or later as well as
desktop pics.

> One of the great things about GC from its early days (I think it goes
> back to System 6 or even earlier) was that Mr. Lemke wanted it to be 
> able to convert _any_ graphic format to any other, and he invited you to
> find obscure ones for him to add to the list. It's all still there, too.
> I mean, really, TRS-80?

Could be handy for emulation enthusiasts. I know GC came in handy making
a startup screen for System 6 in vMac mini just last year. Still, who
really cares as to the justification? :-) It's just plain cool to have
there!
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8718

In article <1khp582.h42c9lyktl0zN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
 jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:

> I was just looking through the advanced prefs at the graphic formats
> supported (FYI - not all are enabled by default), and there are a LOT.
> Somehow it's reassuring in 2012 I still have access to old esoteric
> formats like Startup Screen and ppat :-)
> 
> Bonus points to anyone able to tell me what ppat is. No cheating with
> Google! :-D

ppat was the format for the Desktop pattern which was then tiled across 
the screen, 16x16 IIRC.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8719

Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:

> In article <1khp582.h42c9lyktl0zN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
> > I was just looking through the advanced prefs at the graphic formats
> > supported (FYI - not all are enabled by default), and there are a LOT.
> > Somehow it's reassuring in 2012 I still have access to old esoteric
> > formats like Startup Screen and ppat :-)
> > 
> > Bonus points to anyone able to tell me what ppat is. No cheating with
> > Google! :-D
> 
> ppat was the format for the Desktop pattern which was then tiled across
> the screen, 16x16 IIRC.

Congrats Fred - You're right! :-) I remembered cause I always enjoyed
making classic MacOS look good, or at least to my tastes. I spent hours
trying to make good looking paterns in B&W on the compact Macs. Later on
colour Macs I neglected patterns and discovered the joy of desktop pics,
and control panels like Decor
<http://pauillac.inria.fr/~fpottier/decor.html.en>.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8790

In article <1khnmds.1snoefhojijfN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
 jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:

> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1khniyl.1gd0u0k1ok4mjwN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> >  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> > 
> > > Aye, I'd not bother trying to do image editing in your scanner app -
> > > I've never found one with decent tools. However GraphicConverter is
> > > excellent for this purpose. Every serious Mac user should own a copy,
> > > unless you already have Photoshop, perhaps - but even then GC is so
> > > quick, easy and inexpensive for edits and of conversion into other
> > > formats, I've hardly ever used more serious image editing apps even when
> > > they've been available :-)
> > > -- 
> > 
> > But I've used less sophisticated tools like iPhoto, for reducing 
> > resolution for like email. Seems like reducing resolution is a lost 
> > feature, IIRC it used to be in GC, but no longer is. I suppose iPhoto
> > is just easier to use.
> 
> You mean scaling? I can do that in GC 6.7.6 (not upgraded to 7 yet - no
> need, but I'd be shocked if it's gone) using the Picture->Size menu. Or
> if you mean reducing image quality you can set quality of compression
> (depending on the file format chosen), and/or specify a file size using
> Options in the Save As… dialog.

Ops, how did I miss that.

-- 
This space unintentionally left blank.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8704

In article <proto-94BE30.12522027032012@news.panix.com>,
 Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:

> In article <1khniyl.1gd0u0k1ok4mjwN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
> > Aye, I'd not bother trying to do image editing in your scanner app -
> > I've never found one with decent tools. However GraphicConverter is
> > excellent for this purpose. Every serious Mac user should own a copy,
> > unless you already have Photoshop, perhaps - but even then GC is so
> > quick, easy and inexpensive for edits and of conversion into other
> > formats, I've hardly ever used more serious image editing apps even when
> > they've been available :-)
> > -- 
> 

Depends on quite what stuff, I recall figuring that Photoshop and 
Fireworks would always be better quality than anything that was built 
into the scanner software for most things I wanted but it may be 
important with a big job of varying material to be able to organise 
varying kinds of scans for different parts of what is on the bed and 
for that, some nice scanning software with good design for intuitive 
use is understandably wanted. Me, I just scanned most things at pretty 
high res and would fix, like you, as I liked later. But that was 
mostly for individual items. 

Anyway, I greatly sympathise with OP, his concerns seem mostly about 
user interface for many basic functions. 

> But I've used less sophisticated tools like iPhoto, for reducing 
> resolution for like email. Seems like reducing resolution is a lost 
> feature, IIRC it used to be in GC, but no longer is. I suppose iPhoto 
> is just easier to use.

iPhoto has always seemed to me one of the most awkward apps ever 
invented to use for photo editing. It's strength seems to be to 
automate the organization of photos.

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8701

On 3/27/12 10:20 AM, gtr wrote:
> I did the same a number of years ago with a cheap Cano scanner that no
> longer works under Lion. I used their software. If their software won't
> work for you, I'd contact Canon.

I used to use CanoScan. While upgrading to Lion, I contacted Canon and 
they informed me that they are no longer supporting that software. They 
recommended (and I purchased) VueScan.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8702

On 2012-03-27 22:07:27 +0000, Ed Anson said:

> On 3/27/12 10:20 AM, gtr wrote:
>> I did the same a number of years ago with a cheap Cano scanner that no
>> longer works under Lion. I used their software. If their software won't
>> work for you, I'd contact Canon.
> 
> I used to use CanoScan. While upgrading to Lion, I contacted Canon and 
> they informed me that they are no longer supporting that software. They 
> recommended (and I purchased) VueScan.

I'm surprised they no longer provide any scanner software at all on the 
Mac. Very short-sighted of them.
-- 
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us 
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. 
-- Galileo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.apps

csiph-web