HP Scanjet G4050 Photo Scanner (L1957A#B1H)
The HP ScanJet G4050 Photo Scanner contains technology exclusive to HP - six-color, 96-bit scanning at 4800x9600dpi. The scanner produces incredibly color-accurate, faithful and detailed images that make impressive reprints for those who wish to scan photos, slides, negatives and documents to an almost professional standard.The scanner is perfect for the restoration of old photos due to built-in hardware based dust and scratch removal. Faded color can easily be heightened, dust and scratches removed and dark areas lightened using HP Real Life technologies.
Designed to quickly and easily preserve precious memories, HP's ScanJet G4050 Photo Scanner lets you scan slides, negatives, and photos with superior color accuracy. Capture realistic color with high-definition photo and film scanning through HP's exclusive 96-bit scanning. Enjoy high-definition scans with 4,800 x 9,600 dpi resolution and preserve crisp text in scanned documents. The device comes with built-in dust and scratch removal tools, and you can edit text from scanned documents and magazines. Scan up to 16 35mm slides or 30 negative frames at once and bring old or damaged photos back to life by restoring faded colors. Superior color accuracy, high-definition scans with 4800 x 9600 dpi, and speedy previews (as fast as 8.5 seconds) are easily achieved with the G4050. Compatible with Windows 2000 and later and Mac OS X 10.3.8 and later operating systems, the scanner is backed by a 1-year manufacturer's limited warranty. Weighing in at just over 11.5 pounds, the scanner measures 20 x 11.93 x 4.25 inches. What's in the Box
HP Scanjet G4050 photo scanner, template kit, USB cable, power supply adapter/power cords, software and User's Guide CDs, Setup and Support Guide, and I.R.I.S. registration flyer
HP Scanjet G4050 Photo Scanner (L1957A#B1H) Accessories
 Adobe Photoshop Elements 6 [OLD VERSION]
Adobe Photoshop Elements 6 & Adobe Premiere Elements 4 [OLD VERSION]
Belkin F3U133-10 Hi-Speed USB 2.0 Cable (10 Feet)
Scanning Negatives and Slides: Digitizing Your Photographic Archives
D-Link DUB-H7 High Speed USB 2.0 7-Port Hub
Nikon 7072 Lens Pen Cleaning System
Roxio Easy Media Creator Suite 10 [OLD VERSION]
HP G4010 ScanJet Photo Scanner
Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 [OLD VERSION]
HP Scanjet G4050 Photo Scanner (L1957A#B1H) Reviews
.
Anther flop. Just think of the time and frustration you will save by not buying his product.
Back in box back to store. Not worth the trouble.
Visa for get it. It's time computer and hardware companies stopped forcing their customers to fix their products.
The hours of install and work around and wasting of time.
Truly one step scanning. I have never had a product this easy to set up and use. Flawless printing. I absolutely love it. It is fast and puts the photos right into iPhoto hassle free. I also own a HP printer #6980 and it is the best printer I have ever owned.
Throwing out the highs and the lows, the Epson generally gets excellent scan quality reviews, with some mention of buggy drivers and flimsy slide and negative accessories. I am a fairly experienced computer user and have really gotten into Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements over the last year or two. I saw the Epson, Canon, and HP scanners at a couple of local retailers and had the opportunity to at least compare their build quality. The HP software is not quite as new or fresh, but it works for me and the scanner is very well built (at least the parts I can see and touch.). It is a few years old and continues to work extremely well. .
I also have an HP Officejet multifunction printer/scanner/fax/copier. The scan quality is what did it for me. The Canon and the Epson use LED lighting, which is quicker than the HP lighting. None of the scanners, especially at this price point, is without a compromise. Photo scanning is a niche product line.
I have had luck with HP products. No, but both HP scanners (the one I returned and the one I kept) from different sellers sounded the same. The Canon gets pretty good reviews on build quality and photo scan quality and most people seem to think its software has a cleaner interface. They are not commercial applications, but over the past year I have come to see they are pretty powerful programs and allow the home user to get genuinely professional level results for family projects. I . Most people are happy with their multi-function devices and are not looking to output professional level work. The Canon software is a bit easier to use, but the HP, while not super easy is fairly straightforward to use once you play with it for a bit. I am scanning and restoring family photos; so, I am in no rush.
A few reviews on the web have stated the g4050's scans may be a bit oversaturated in terms of color, but I feel the scans are quite good and often are actually an improvement from the picture without actually taking anything away from the picture in terms of detail or resolution. My review will focus on scanning photos. I am a husband and father of 3 young children with lots of pre-digital photos of our children, along with perhaps a couple of thousand old family photos dating back to the 1930s. That makes some sense, though, since I have read that the 6 color scanning feature is for use when scanning photos printed from ink jets or items such as ribbon or artwork. Good luck in your choice. I don't want to have a scanner that is super slow, but I do not mind if the scanner is not fast. As I have become more serious and discriminating in my photo and video work wherein I really am looking to get as high quality output as possible I think I have come to be able tell the difference between good quality and excellent quality at the hobbyist/prosumer level. I found the HP and Canon scanned the black and white photos comparably, but the color scans are what made me decide to return the Canon.
My system: AMD 4000 dual core, 3 gig of ram, a 500 gig hard drive and a 320 gig hard drive, standard video card, running XP. There are numerous reviews of these 3 scanners. I use my scanner at night when the children are asleep. Having said that, I also have experienced buggy HP software, tech support that is obviously outsourced to India with both excellent support personnel and pretty poor support personnel. The Epson feels inexpensively made (very much so), the Canon feels fairly well made, and the HP appears to be the best built of the 3 scanners, by a fair margin.
The output from the scanners also is the same, which at least says something for manufacturing consistency. This because these items are produced with inks and materials that are not as easily scanned by traditional scanners. I also found that I preferred the HP scans. The HP is noisy, though. HP tech support, though, has pretty extended hours (both live by telephone and live chat) and while it can be frustrating to talk with someone who obviously is reading from a script I have found on the few occasions I have called that my problem gets fixed and most tech support personnel are nice and genuinely want to help resolve the issue. and the resulting scans truly are excellent. Like many, I narrowed the search for a scanner to the Canoscan 8800f, The Epson V500, and the HP G4050.
I purchased the HP, returned it, purchased the Canon, returned it, and then re-purchased the HP. I felt, however, that the HP g4050 was the best built unit, and while a bit slow, produces great scans. It seems to be generally accepted that the next step up is the Epson V700 or V750, about $500 and $700, respectively. Plus, photos from my parents and grandparents are all odd little sizes, so having a little extra space on the glass is helpful when trying to scan multiple photos. A decently powered system, but not super fast. There have been a number of reviews that have focused on scanning negatives and slides. I did not try the Epson, but for me the HP was a winner over the Canon.
That is a good thing, because the Canon is quick and the HP is definitely not. The Canon was not a bad scanner and is in fact pretty speedy. Will it wake my children and wife. The HP is seen as the most ruggedly built and the largest in size, but is viewed as performing slowly and having software that is either difficult to make work under Vista (apparently that has now been fixed by HP with full drivers being released) or buggy with a lot of effort with HP tech support being needed to fix things (though once fixed) the scanner gets excellent reviews on photo scan quality. It is an excellent no frills genuine professional quality printer. To compare I scanned a few old black and white photos and a few color photos, in particular a few wedding prints that have a slight matte finish. The HP is big, but it has a slightly larger scanning area to allow for 4 4x6 photos to be scanned at once. This does make a definite difference, but fast or slow is a subjective opinion for these scanners.
I have an HP B8350 wide format printer. The comparison: the Epson, Canon, and HP are in the same price range, but they can very by more than $50 depending upon sales, rebates, and promotions. As most people know who scan photos matte finishes make the resulting scan noisy and "speckly" to a varying degree. Oh, the 6 color scanning is extremely slow and does not produce in my opinion any discernable improvement. I found the HP scanned matte photos significantly better than the Canonthe difference was fairly substantial. As such, while frustrating, it is not surprising that Epson, Canon, and HP have cut corners in their scanning products in terms of software and support.
I use it to scan three dimensional objects and it does a good job. The scanner is very large, it takes a lot of desk space. I do not use it for scanning negatives.
I returned the device with regret, because I liked the ability to scan sixteen 35mm slides-if it works. Later that day a repeat with a different technician for another two hours. After the second call to HP Tech Support, it was declared defective and to be returned. I spent the best part of a day trying to install the scanner, without success. Spent another day with phone calls and no success. I accepted a second G4050 scanner. I would then spend two consecutive hours on the phone to HP Tech Support, with no success.
|
