Screwed by Canon Rebate

Mary wrote:
"TJ" wrote in message
.. .
Mary wrote:

I don't have a copier but have had a flatbed scanner for years. They are
not
very expensive compared to other computer parts. Many people now have
all-in-one printers which include scanners and copiers. But if you need
to
make a special trip to make copies of what you need, then yes, its more
trouble, and may not be worth it unless you think the rebate amount is
worth
it.

I've had a flatbed scanner for years, too - at least five. Bought it
online from Office Max for $20 - after rebate. Got free shipping, too.
And I *did* get the rebate, without hassle or delay beyond that stated
on the form.

What make is the scanner? It must be ok if it still works.

Mary


As explained in another post, it's a Visioneer OneTouch 7600 USB
scanner. The maximum native resolution is 600 dpi, better than many in
its class of that time. No doubt it has been superseded by newer models,
but it still does the job it was designed to do as well as it did when
it was new. It doesn't owe me a dime.

TJ


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

:-D

Nicolaas Hawkins wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:27:29 GMT, measekite wrote in
. net:


Measekite will no doubt consider it a piece of junk because it doesn't
do slides or something. So what? That's not what I bought it for.

How about your Brownie Hawkeye


I'm sure his Brownie Hawkeye is pointed in your direction.

TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:
Bill wrote:
measekite wrote:
TJ wrote:

I've had a flatbed scanner for years, too - at least five. Bought it
online from Office Max for $20 - after rebate. Got free shipping,
too.
And I *did* get the rebate, without hassle or delay beyond that
stated
on the form.

TJ

At that price it is probably a piece of trash

Obviously not since it's still working after 5 years. You don't
need a really high resolution scanner if all you're using it for is
scanning documents.

Bill

I'm not concerned with Measekite's opinion. I've dealt with him
before in the printer newsgroup, heard everything he has to say, ad
nauseum. Google his name, if you wish to know more. IMHO, however,
it wouldn't be worth the bandwidth.

My scanner is a Visioneer OneTouch 7600 USB. It's a letter/A4
scanner, with a native resolution of 600 dpi. The software will
interpolate

Oh thats software magnification

Thank you for clarifying that, but I believe that's what I said.

to 1200 dpi using Windows 98.

Oh thats so outdated it is a joke. Not even supported any more

Ah, but it *was* still supported 5 years ago when I bought the
scanner. Not particularly well, since Windows 98 was a joke the day it
was released, but that's another subject.

It does still work just fine, though I don't use it much any more.
Mandriva Linux doesn't support it,

O course not. Unfortunately, that is one of the problems with all
Linux distributions. It does not support many things including
Photoshop

I beg to differ. Most scanners are supported by Linux. The A3 chipset
scanners are an exception. And as for Photoshop, versions up to the
latest can be run with a Linux program called WINE. I'm quite sure the
latest version will be runnable with WINE soon.

WINE is overhead. It cannot run it natively. Thats like OS2 running
Windows programs.

or any of the scanners that use the A3 chipset. That is the only
reason I don't use it much anymore. I wish it *was* supported.
Measekite will no doubt consider it a piece of junk because it
doesn't do slides or something. So what? That's not what I bought it
for.

How about your Brownie Hawkeye

If I could still get film for it, my mother's Brownie would work just
fine, thank you. Good to know you can appreciate one of the historic
cameras that brought photography to the masses.

Correction: It did NOT bring photography to the masses.

It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.

TJ

measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:

How about your Brownie Hawkeye

If I could still get film for it, my mother's Brownie would work just
fine, thank you. Good to know you can appreciate one of the historic
cameras that brought photography to the masses.

Correction: It did NOT bring photography to the masses.

It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, just as I'm entitled to mine. I
suspect, though, that more people would agree with me than with you. And
I suspect even more people would appreciate it if we both would just
shut up.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"TJ" wrote in message
.. .
Mary wrote:
"TJ" wrote in message
.. .
Mary wrote:

I don't have a copier but have had a flatbed scanner for years. They
are
not
very expensive compared to other computer parts. Many people now have
all-in-one printers which include scanners and copiers. But if you
need
to
make a special trip to make copies of what you need, then yes, its
more
trouble, and may not be worth it unless you think the rebate amount is
worth
it.

I've had a flatbed scanner for years, too - at least five. Bought it
online from Office Max for $20 - after rebate. Got free shipping, too.
And I *did* get the rebate, without hassle or delay beyond that stated
on the form.

What make is the scanner? It must be ok if it still works.

Mary


As explained in another post, it's a Visioneer OneTouch 7600 USB
scanner. The maximum native resolution is 600 dpi, better than many in
its class of that time. No doubt it has been superseded by newer models,
but it still does the job it was designed to do as well as it did when
it was new. It doesn't owe me a dime.

TJ

Well, thats the main thing.

Mary


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:


It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.

Ohhhh...that idiot thinks he's a photographer. Excuse me while I laugh
so hard my ribs are hurting!
Enough...hehehe...hehehe...please!!!
I can't take it anymore.
Frank

"measekite" wrote in message
et...


TJ wrote:

If I could still get film for it, my mother's Brownie would work just
fine, thank you. Good to know you can appreciate one of the historic
cameras that brought photography to the masses.

Correction: It did NOT bring photography to the masses.

It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.

TJ


Snapshooting is photography. Snapshooting is just lower quality The
photographer determines the quality much more than the camera. More people
having reasonable access to equipment allows more quality photographers to
emerge.

It was really about not having to develop your own image. Kind of like the
difference of using an outhouse or a Crapper in January.

TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:

How about your Brownie Hawkeye

If I could still get film for it, my mother's Brownie would work
just fine, thank you. Good to know you can appreciate one of the
historic cameras that brought photography to the masses.

Correction: It did NOT bring photography to the masses.

It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, just as I'm entitled to mine. I
suspect, though, that more people would agree with me

No more snapshooters will agree with you and there are only 150,000
professional and amateur photographers in the U.S.
than with you. And I suspect even more people would appreciate it if
we both would just shut up.

You can.

TJ

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
"Captain Midnight" said in misc.consumers:


"measekite" wrote in message
.net...

Correction: It did NOT bring photography to the masses.

It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.

What an ignorant and arrogant statement from our resident idiot/troll
measher****head.
He thinks if your have an SLR camera you're a photographer. Whereas if
you have a PAS camera you're a snap shooter. In other words, the
equipment makes the difference between a great picture and a really bad one.
This clown is an excellent example of a bad example.
Frank

I posted the following reply three days ago, but it hasn't yet appeared
in the printer newsgroup, where I'm reading this thread. I'm posting
again, in hopes that this time it will get here. I apologize to any
group where it appears twice.

And for all those who have a spell over top-posting: Get over it.
Sometimes it makes more sense to do it this way.

TJ

Captain Midnight wrote:
"measekite" wrote in message
et...

TJ wrote:
If I could still get film for it, my mother's Brownie would work just
fine, thank you. Good to know you can appreciate one of the historic
cameras that brought photography to the masses.
Correction: It did NOT bring photography to the masses.

It just empowered a bunch of snapshooters. That is not photography.
TJ


Snapshooting is photography. Snapshooting is just lower quality The
photographer determines the quality much more than the camera. More people
having reasonable access to equipment allows more quality photographers to
emerge.

It was really about not having to develop your own image. Kind of like the
difference of using an outhouse or a Crapper in January.


My father died in July, a victim of lung cancer from years of smoking
cigarettes. My youngest brother died three years ago, also a victim of
cancer - that one from unknown causes. Yesterday I came across a snapshot
of the two of them, taken around 35 years ago. They're standing on the dock
at a fishing camp, my then five-year-old brother proudly holding up the
8-inch fish he had just caught. My father, in the full vigor of his life,
is standing slightly behind him, hands on hips, smiling at him. When I
think of my father, the image that forms in my mind is much like the one
I see in this photo, not the one of the sick, old man of his last year.

I'm not sure who caught the shot, whether it was me, my mother, or one
of my other brothers, but the moment was preserved by a simple,
inexpensive snapshot camera. By professional standards, the quality is
poor, and has deteriorated with age. Colors have faded, and they are no
longer quite the correct hues. But this old print still has the power
to invoke strong memories, the power to show even strangers something
of the man my father once was, and the happiness he gave to his children.

That image would never have existed but for the simple, inexpensive
snapshot camera. There are thousands, millions of snapshots, taken by
non-professionals, that accomplish the same thing, around the world.

If that's not photography, I don't know what is.

TJ



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com