3 Responses to “Microtek ScanMaker i320 High-Resolution Flatbed Scanner”

1. Anonymous
   November 17th, 2009 @ 4:45 pm

   I’m a long-time user of Microtek scanners, and have generally found that even their low end products are reliable and deliver great results.

   The i320 installed and worked without a hitch when attached to a new Athlon-based PC running Windows XP Home Edition, and I immediately started testing it using a high quality 8×10 photograph. One issue I encountered right off is that the quality of scans was inferior to that of my previous scanner, a Microtek 3600. After working with the i320 for a while, I discovered what I think is the reason. This model, like most current scanners, has a very high hardware resolution – 3200dpi. My older scanner has a hardware resolution of 600dpi. One frequently overlooked fact about this increased resolution is that the much smaller size of today’s sensors makes them a lot more vulnerable to optical noise, which degrades image quality. (And by the way, that higher resolution is of no value when scanning photographs, since most photo detail can be resolved at 300dpi.)

   I found that I was able to get the scanner to behave more like a 600dpi model by using the Descreen option in the ScanWizard software. (Try setting it between 100 and 200lpi). This cleaned up the noise dramatically, and I was happy.

   What I was not so happy about is the Digital ICE feature. This is a proven technology that has been employed in high end film scanners with great success. I don’t know how successfully it’s been used in flatbed scanners, but my tests with the i320 were not impressive. I tried numerous variations of scan resolution and ICE settings on some old photos, both color and B&W. In no case did the ICE function ever clean up even one speck of dust or debris on any of my photos. It did help a bit in correcting physical damage such as wrinkles or tears, but I frankly have very few photos in such bad condition.

   Aside from the extra cost in dollars that the ICE function adds to the scanner, it also costs a lot in time. Scans with ICE enabled are sloooooow! You’ll have to wait several minutes while the scanner does nothing at all except display a message about warming up. This happens with each and every scan – how warm does it need to be? Unless you have a shoebox full of mangled photos, I can’t see this implementation of Digital ICE being worthwhile.

   Another minor disappointment was the ColoRescue feature. This is supposed to restore proper colors to faded photos, but in my tests it usually produced silly, garish results. I found it preferable to scan without it and fix the colors in Photoshop.

   Bottom line – this is a perfectly fine scanner. However, it probably won’t produce great results with the default settings. You’ll have to explore the intricacies of the ScanWizard software (which, by the way, is one of the best scanner control programs out there and is the main reason why I continue to buy Microtek stuff). And it won’t clean up dust and debris on photos. Consider saving a few bucks by getting the Microtek 6000 without Digital ICE, or instead spend more on one of the higher end models where the ICE function might really work!

2. Fidel
   November 17th, 2009 @ 9:42 pm

   I got this scanner for its features and based on the reputation Microtek has in the professional imaging arena, where they are a major player. It was to replace my old HP scanner that is slow and whose quality is no longer up to snuff.
   After unpacking the scanner, I followed the installation instructions, which are basically install the software, restart and connect the scanner – and suddenly I was back in the dark ages of Windows 95. Eithr using a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 just failed to work with the scanner. Especially bad is the fact that the computer actually did detect the scanner but Microtek’s scanner detection software refused to agree. Even when it did find it, it would hang and the scanner remained unusable.
   After disconnecting all Firewire and USB devices, the scanner was finally detected by the software when it was the sole device connected to a USB 1.1 port. Then it was really fast and finally showed its promise.
   Now it is back in the box and on the way back to the store. Microtek better wake up and discover that hardware these days does install plug-n-play. HP may build inferior products, but they work.

3. Kevlyn
   November 17th, 2009 @ 11:08 pm

   This scanner is a great value for the price. Excellent resolution, fairly quick scans. I have to agree in saying there is quite a bit to install intially, but not that bad overall. Epson scanners I have installed have had nearly the same amount of software. The software seems to lock up every once in a while on my PowerBook G4 1.33 Ghz running Mac OS 10.3.8(if anyone has any tips about that let me know), but runs great on my Windows XP Home SP1 machine. Overall probably the best quality scanner for the money.

Leave a Reply