MP161 / MP171 / MP201 - Can these models scan x-rays well?

[slimslob]

What about an A4 sized mirror?

Not very likely. It would have to be a first surface mirror which would make it highly susceptible to scratching. They image quality, especially the grey scale and focus, would be poor due to the light having to pass through the film twice. The reflective surface of the film it self would also affect the amount of light passed to the mirror. Medical and dental x-rays need a very high degree of focus and very precise levels of grey scale. Actual x-ray scanners also have a higher resolution than the average copy machine.

[teebee1234]

NOT GONNA WORK!!!

THE LIGHT ON THE SCANNER HEAD HAS TO BE OFF!!!

A TRANSPARENCY SCANNER TRANSMITS LIGHT THROUGH THE MEDIA BEING SCANNED TO THE SCANNER HEAD!!!

DOH!!!

THE MFP WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A LIGHT BUILT INTO THE ADF LID!!!

Not sure why you are yelling but DOH!!, you will get an image reflected back from the scanner lamp if you set the original settings to manual AND backlight it enough from above the original to add contrast. It's clunky and probably not worth hassling over. I've seen it done, so next time be sure of your facts so you don't come off looking foolish. And get a new keyboard, your caps lock is stuck.

[patterson70]

Thanks everyone, I am going to test it out and will report back when I have an answer. It might be a while however.

[qbert69]

Not sure why you are yelling but DOH!!, you will get an image reflected back from the scanner lamp if you set the original settings to manual AND backlight it enough from above the original to add contrast. It's clunky and probably not worth hassling over. I've seen it done, so next time be sure of your facts so you don't come off looking foolish. And get a new keyboard, your caps lock is stuck.

LOL!....thanks!

btw, I have had to deal with an "issue" like this.

My Dad had an old print that was a glass type negative:

History of Photography Glass plate negatives

anyway, long story short, i had to use a reflective process and a good bit of post processing to make it look good.

I suspect with the x-ray negatives that the D-Min and D-Max are going to be greatly lacking in the reflective scan process, which would in turn affect the contrast and detail that are able to be seen.

Just my 2 Cents/Pence worth!

[qbert69]

Not very likely. It would have to be a first surface mirror which would make it highly susceptible to scratching. They image quality, especially the grey scale and focus, would be poor due to the light having to pass through the film twice. The reflective surface of the film it self would also affect the amount of light passed to the mirror. Medical and dental x-rays need a very high degree of focus and very precise levels of grey scale. Actual x-ray scanners also have a higher resolution than the average copy machine.

In photographic class, I made a pinhole camera out of a coffee can.

I used photographic paper for the negative AND the positive.

When I transferred/printed the positive, I laid the negative imaged paper down on top of the paper that was going to be the positive--emulsion to emulsion and exposed the light through the paper backing on the negative. By having emulsion to emulsion printing, the light diffusion was kept to a minimum and I was able to get a fairly decent print positive!

Same goes for the analog to digital process...emulsion down towards the imaging mechanism so the light is not diffused having to go through the plastic of the film.

[patterson70]

Well, the jury is in and the answer is no - the xray scans are not detailed enough to show the tooth's root under the gum. It is very light and just will not show up no matter what setting I tried. Many thanks to everyone for their input!

[peterxu256]

Testing the color scanner, Unbelieveable, the image totally FULL darkness, much like x-rays, no idea what is wrong with it. B/W default scanning is perfect fine. double check the scan setting. no clue at all.

[sandmanmac]

Testing the color scanner, Unbelieveable, the image totally FULL darkness, much like x-rays, no idea what is wrong with it. B/W default scanning is perfect fine. double check the scan setting. no clue at all.

You've done it again ! - Hi-jacked a completely unrelated thread, rather than starting a new one!
We can't even be be sure of the exact model. Because Your hi-jacks typically aren't related to the model being discussed!
Did you do ANYTHING to help yourself??!!! or just make a test scan and walk out the door?
Surely you experimented with some different scan settings?
Perhaps tried memory clearing the scanner??!
Does the lamp come on?
If you tell us this result was from a cheque? I'm going to blow a gasket! (But that's what I'm betting on)
"Unbelievable " is right!

[slimslob]

You've done it again ! - Hi-jacked a completely unrelated thread, rather than starting a new one!
We can't even be be sure of the exact model. Because Your hi-jacks typically aren't related to the model being discussed!
Did you do ANYTHING to help yourself??!!! or just make a test scan and walk out the door?
Surely you experimented with some different scan settings?
Perhaps tried memory clearing the scanner??!
Does the lamp come on?
If you tell us this result was from a cheque? I'm going to blow a gasket! (But that's what I'm betting on)
"Unbelievable " is right!

I already have him on my ignore list.

[sandmanmac]

I already have him on my ignore list.

Me too.... But sometimes I just can't help myself