>Have you tried Vuescan with your PLII Yes, I bought a copy;amd found it does permit the Umax to work with Win XP. However it is not a twain driver and does not allow the scanner to be used from within applications like Photoshop, OmniForm, or OmniPage. I did download a newer version of MagicScan for Win 2000; and as I noted ot does provide a workable twain driver that will work with Photoshop but not OmniPage or OmniForM for some reason. The BinuScan application within it does not work at all with Win XP.
> The problem with the old firmware in PLIII's with XP was that > it caused > multiple device manager entries for the scanner. The new > Magicscan and a > registry fix on the Umax site caused my scanner to be listed properly > without the new firmware. Interesting, I found that to be a known problem with every SCSI flatbed scanner that I ever owned under both Win 98 and Win XP. The version of MagicScan which I downloaded for Win 2000 now produces the multiple entries in Device Manager like previous versions; but, unlike previous versions, it now registers in the Scanners and Cameras dialog box as well. In the Device Manager, it registers 7 instances of "Umax OL-II SCSI Scanner Device" with no date and exclamation marks as well as one instance of "Umax PowerLook II" without an exclamation mark and with a 1/11/2000 date. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lloyd O'Daniel > Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 4:43 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Umax experience > > > Laurie, > > Bummer on the Powerlook II. In general, I agree with everything you > wrote below. In this particular case, I got lucky. I did research the > site before I bought and found a Magicscan upgrade version that was XP > compatible. I had actually been shopping for a scanner for contact > sheets for awhile. I didn't want to put the $$$ in for a new > Epson 1680. > I narrowed my choice to either a used Epson 1600 or a new or > used PLIII. > I did take note that, for the longest, Umax's site stated that their > scanners were not XP compatible. Totally amazing to me that they were > that slow in upgrading. I bid on 1-2 epsons and did not bid on > Powerlooks until I knew they had compatible software. Of > course, I knew > that I could use Vuescan or (gulp) buy Silverfast. Have you tried > Vuescan with your PLII? > > The problem with the old firmware in PLIII's with XP was that > it caused > multiple device manager entries for the scanner. The new > Magicscan and a > registry fix on the Umax site caused my scanner to be listed properly > without the new firmware. > > Lloyd > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Laurie Solomon > Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 11:43 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Umax experience > > > Lloyd, > > I have a Umax Powerlook II, which I like very much; but I have had > problems getting it to function in twain mode under Windows XP when > using upgraded Magicscan and Binuscan software. Upon > checking the Umax > web sight, I found no upgrades for that scanner when it came > to software > that would work with Win XP; a call to Umax did not help either. They > suggested trying the Win 2000 upgrade which enabled the > MagicScan twain > to work so that the scanner could be used; but the Binuscan > PhotoPerfect > portion did not work. Moreover, for some reason, the MagicScan twain > would not work with programs such as OmniPage and OmniForm. > > My point is that your experience seems to indicate that, as > is often the > case with many support staffs, they really do not always know > what they > are talking about when they give advice. In your case as in mine, it > was not the scanner hardware or firmware that would not work > with WinXP > but the damn software, which they do not really keep up > todate in terms > of upgrading and which the web site is totally ineffective in > providing > good substantive information on. Their sight when it comes to support > and upgrade information is lacking. Their telephone support > service can > be expensive as pointed out and generally not all that helpful even if > you get through, despite the fact that the personnel may be > very nice to > deal with and attempt to be helpful. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with > 'unsubscribe filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the > message title or body > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
