review: Umax Powerlook 1000 Legal-Size Scanner a winner

[fantastic_four]

I think I was looking before I saved it as a jpg... I should have realized.

 

However, i think the size of the file varies depending on how/where its being stored?

I just checked the file sizes (on my hard drive) of the items I uploaded to the forum:

 

GI Combat.... 244K 100 dpi 13"???

Hulk 180....... 268K 72 dpi 12"

Hulk 182....... 252K 72 dpi 12"

ST 178a....... 220K 72 dpi 12"

ST 178b....... 268K 72 dpi 12"

 

...all well in excess of 150K, BUT as you mentioned they show up as different file sizes when you checked? I don't get it.

 

 

 

You use a Mac, right? Sounds like the way files are stored in whatever file system format the Mac uses isn't as efficient as the board's Linux file system format. I saved that GI Combat file to my hard disk using the Microsoft NTFS file system and it's around 151K.

[BronzeBruce13]

yeah..on a Mac. Maybe there's a formula? Its a pain in the arse trying to get the images as large as possible while staying within the limit. I often have to keep "saving as"... with minor reductions until it uploads

[CaptainBackfire]

I'm not sure, but the file size your Mac is reporting may include the resource fork, which contains stuff like the thumbnail icon and various other things that may be getting saved by your application. Typically when you transfer a file from a Mac HFS volume to some other file system, the resource fork is stripped and ignored on the target file system. Just a guess..

[BronzeBruce13]

Thanks cap... its an explanation, but I need a fix/suggestion to save myself the time.

[Warlord]

yeah..on a Mac. Maybe there's a formula? Its a pain in the arse trying to get the images as large as possible while staying within the limit. I often have to keep "saving as"... with minor reductions until it uploads

 

I don't know about Macs and their file system. Probably works similar to Windows in some ways though. In the Windows world, you store files in one or more pieces called blocks. Depending on the File Allocation Table (FAT) system that you are using, and the size of your hard drive, the size of those blocks WILL VARY. Well, on a given PC all the blocks are the same size, but on a comparable PC with a larger HD you could well find that the blocks are LARGER.

 

This is because the FAT can only keep track of so many blocks. Basically it has to divide the size of your HD by the number of blocks that can be tracked in your FAT to determine the size each block will be.

 

A stupid simple example. Suppose my FAT can track only 10 blocks. Suppose my HD is 10GB. Each block that my FAT tracks will be 1GB. So any file I store, even just one character, will have a file size of 1GB of disk space used!!

 

Now suppose I have the same FAT that can track 10 blocks, but I've replaced my HD with a 200GB drive. Now each block is 20GB. That same 1 character file will have a file size of 20GB, because it uses one block. A file that

has 20GB+1 characters in it will be reported as 40GB of disk space in use, because it uses two blocks.

 

Back to the real world, you'll find that FAT systems track blocks that are more like 2K, 4K, 8K, 16K, or 32K etc in size. So if your FAT can track lots of the small sized blocks like 2K, your 1 character file would use up 2K.

 

I just checked a real file on my Win XP system. It says that the real file size is 162 bytes. However, the "size on disk" is 4,096 (4K) bytes. Obviously my block size is 4K, so any file anywhere on my PC will require a minimum of 4K (1 block) of disk space to store.

 

Clear as mud?

 

OK, I return you to your regularly scheduled CGC forum topic now.

 

[BronzeBruce13]

Thanks Grell-Fan,

Its a bit of a bummer, but I'll just keep doin' what I'm doin'

 

I appreciate the time and effort

 

 

[PovertyRow]

I just checked a real file on my Win XP system. It says that the real file size is 162 bytes. However, the "size on disk" is 4,096 (4K) bytes. Obviously my block size is 4K, so any file anywhere on my PC will require a minimum of 4K (1 block) of disk space to store.

 

That is the real bottom line - it is called "cluster size" - a cluster being the smallest unit a hard drive can be broken down into. So if you have a 2000 byte cluster size, and a 5000 byte file, that file will occupy 3 clusters. It will occupt 2 full 2000 byte clusters and 1/2 of a 2000 byte cluster.

 

However, the file size is actually 5000 and not 6000 bytes. That "size on disk" is mainly to inform the computer user of wasted disk space.

 

Now, if you take that 5000 byte file and upload it to a different computer, maybe a different operating system like Unix, the file size will still be the original 5000 bytes but whatever cluster size of the other computer has will dictate the "size on disk". This, however, should not be a factor when trying to estimate if your file is too large for another host. Just the actual file size is.

[greggy]

Computer geeks alert!

[Comicdave]

Hey bruce, does your scanner have a preview scan feature? I have an HP 3200C and it doesn't have this feature, so I have to make a full scan, taking about 30-40 seconds, just to check if the item on the scanner bed is straight or not.

[BronzeBruce13]

sure.. it has a preview

[duncan36]

Rotate on your behind, Bubbles. Don't want or need this kind of tripe scattered all over different threads. This WAS an interesting thread with some value until you came along with your childish bullshet.

 

The less you post the better this place is. So do us all a favor and make this the best place you can.

 

::typo edited thanks to BOC::

 

Learn to inject your pearls of wisdom with a bit of humour you crusty old fart.

See the crusty old fart bit was the humour part if you didnt catch on. For all I know you could be a svelte chickmagnet.

After your finished bullying some hapless comic enjoying kid who wanders onto here, perhaps you can go and lash out at some kids on the My Little Pony Forum.

[Warlord]

Here's the same scan with the minor contrast and sharpening adjustment

 

 

Here's the quality I've gotten from my Umax Astra 1200S. Raw scan of the CGC slab is a little dark, but I just run up the brightness and contrast a little and it pops out nicely.