I'm sure at least Mcroskell will check, if not Mr.Cook (the donor) himself.Mcroskell: I've e-mailed you Mr.Cook's e-mail address to the e-mail address you had on the wiki
Large Score Donation
Moderator: kcleung
-
mcroskell
- regular poster
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:29 am
- notabot: YES
- notabot2: Bot
- Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
OK, I've sent Mr. Cook an email and am awaiting his response. I mentioned how he could check and see if any of them are already posted, however if he doesn't have the time I will certainly do so myself.
Is there going to be some kind of template similar to the one for the MIT project (i.e. {{MIT project}}) that we put in the Misc. notes for any score that is posted from this collection? Also, maybe a project page where we can keep track of people participating, what composers have been done, who is left to do, etc.
Is there going to be some kind of template similar to the one for the MIT project (i.e. {{MIT project}}) that we put in the Misc. notes for any score that is posted from this collection? Also, maybe a project page where we can keep track of people participating, what composers have been done, who is left to do, etc.
-
mcroskell
- regular poster
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:29 am
- notabot: YES
- notabot2: Bot
- Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Also, if anyone is interested in some more information about the printer/scanners posted by Feldmahler, here are some extensive reviews for them at CNET.com:
HP 5610
http://reviews.cnet.com/multifunction-d ... prod.txt.1
Brother MFC 240-C
http://reviews.cnet.com/multifunction-d ... prod.txt.1
I also bought my own a few weeks ago and have been pretty happy with it. I went with the Canon Pixma MP530. It costs a little more but it's still pretty afforadable as you can get it for $145 US with free shipping at buy.com.
Here's the review:
Canon Pixma MP530
http://reviews.cnet.com/multifunction-d ... prod.txt.1
HP 5610
http://reviews.cnet.com/multifunction-d ... prod.txt.1
Brother MFC 240-C
http://reviews.cnet.com/multifunction-d ... prod.txt.1
I also bought my own a few weeks ago and have been pretty happy with it. I went with the Canon Pixma MP530. It costs a little more but it's still pretty afforadable as you can get it for $145 US with free shipping at buy.com.
Here's the review:
Canon Pixma MP530
http://reviews.cnet.com/multifunction-d ... prod.txt.1
Nice reviews (and I seem to be wrong about the HP 
, not surprising considering I never actually used it... was just going by the specs) Also, would you mind creating parallel pages for this project too? Maybe we can call it the "Cook score project" I will be very busy and/or away for the next two days, so I won't be able to do much.
P.S. By "parallel pages" I mean pages similar to the MIT project, but of course for this new project.
, not surprising considering I never actually used it... was just going by the specs) Also, would you mind creating parallel pages for this project too? Maybe we can call it the "Cook score project" I will be very busy and/or away for the next two days, so I won't be able to do much.P.S. By "parallel pages" I mean pages similar to the MIT project, but of course for this new project.
If I may interject here, and I don't want this thread to go off topic, but I just couldn't hold my silence. Please do not buy any of those combo print-copy-scan machines as they are pieces of trash and a waste of money. They do all of those things, yes, but all of them poorly instead of any one well. Almost always the drivers are equally horrendous and the support even more-so. If you want to contribute your scans I strongly urge you to invest in a worthwhile scanner, and I'd be happy to give recommendations.
-
mcroskell
- regular poster
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:29 am
- notabot: YES
- notabot2: Bot
- Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Feldmahler, I'll go ahead and get started creating a project page with what information I have. You might check it out once you have the time and add any more pertinent info from your correspondence with Mr. Cook. For instance, do we have a complete list of all the composers for the project, details on shipping, etc.
Daphnis, by all means go ahead and post your recommendations. What kind of price point is one looking at to get a quality stand alone scanner and what kind of things should one look for in the one they get?
Daphnis, by all means go ahead and post your recommendations. What kind of price point is one looking at to get a quality stand alone scanner and what kind of things should one look for in the one they get?
Regarding scanners:
Number one rule regarding scanners (and most physical goods in this world)...you get what you pay for, maybe not entirely in scan quality but in functionality and software. Having said that, any scanner worth buying and keeping for longer than 6 months will run you a minimum of $100 and ones that can be considered "good" for our scanning purposes (music) between $100-200.
Desirable Features:
What most people don't understand about scanning music (this includes Indiana University and the Variations project) is that we're dealing with the simplest kind of image imaginable, one where there are no color variations and no color complexities. The scanner you buy should be able to scan in Black & White mode (1-bit), also known as "line art" or "monochrome." Using this method, governed by what's known as a "threshold level", the scanner will only output an image using 2 colors (or actually just one), and that is black. Grayscale is just that, a varying scale usually with 255 shades of gray where the image may have a number of these. We don't want that for music. The scanner should have a minimum optical resolution of 600dpi. This is very very important and is NOT the same as "enhanced" resolution. "Enhanced" is software interpolated resolution, which means the software is upsampling the image it gets from the scanner, and regardless how good or expensive your scanner is, this can never look as good as an image captured at native or non-interpolated resolution. This measurement is the ability of the scanner to take detailed resolution images of small variations in pictures, like miniature/pocket orchestral scores or scores with massive amounts of players/instruments. Most scanners are now USB 2.0 compliant, so that isn't so much of an issue. Of course we want flatbed scanners, nothing else. Also of interest is the preview scan time, because this is often an indication of total scan time at higher resolutions, lower times being better. Once you get past the hardware requirements the only thing left is the software support, and this can be hit or miss depending on the manufacturer. In short, if you're going to buy a new scanner, get either an HP, which has pretty good software (although a bit confusing) and the ability to set profiles, or an Epson, which are pricier but create outstanding quality images.
For those that are interested in scanning oversized or conductor scores (or if you want a less complicated way for scanning Dover scores), you may want to invest in an A3 scanner. Currently, these are VERY expensive and geared more towards businesses and offices where digitization of records of various sizes is paramount, but Mustek offers the cheapest A3 scanner on the market for ~$170.
Number one rule regarding scanners (and most physical goods in this world)...you get what you pay for, maybe not entirely in scan quality but in functionality and software. Having said that, any scanner worth buying and keeping for longer than 6 months will run you a minimum of $100 and ones that can be considered "good" for our scanning purposes (music) between $100-200.
Desirable Features:
What most people don't understand about scanning music (this includes Indiana University and the Variations project) is that we're dealing with the simplest kind of image imaginable, one where there are no color variations and no color complexities. The scanner you buy should be able to scan in Black & White mode (1-bit), also known as "line art" or "monochrome." Using this method, governed by what's known as a "threshold level", the scanner will only output an image using 2 colors (or actually just one), and that is black. Grayscale is just that, a varying scale usually with 255 shades of gray where the image may have a number of these. We don't want that for music. The scanner should have a minimum optical resolution of 600dpi. This is very very important and is NOT the same as "enhanced" resolution. "Enhanced" is software interpolated resolution, which means the software is upsampling the image it gets from the scanner, and regardless how good or expensive your scanner is, this can never look as good as an image captured at native or non-interpolated resolution. This measurement is the ability of the scanner to take detailed resolution images of small variations in pictures, like miniature/pocket orchestral scores or scores with massive amounts of players/instruments. Most scanners are now USB 2.0 compliant, so that isn't so much of an issue. Of course we want flatbed scanners, nothing else. Also of interest is the preview scan time, because this is often an indication of total scan time at higher resolutions, lower times being better. Once you get past the hardware requirements the only thing left is the software support, and this can be hit or miss depending on the manufacturer. In short, if you're going to buy a new scanner, get either an HP, which has pretty good software (although a bit confusing) and the ability to set profiles, or an Epson, which are pricier but create outstanding quality images.
For those that are interested in scanning oversized or conductor scores (or if you want a less complicated way for scanning Dover scores), you may want to invest in an A3 scanner. Currently, these are VERY expensive and geared more towards businesses and offices where digitization of records of various sizes is paramount, but Mustek offers the cheapest A3 scanner on the market for ~$170.
-
Leonard Vertighel
- Groundskeeper
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 8:55 am
Hello Daphnis, it looks like you are quite experienced with scanners and scanning. Would you be willing to share some of your knowledge on the manual page Scanning music scores? While I do have some experience with image manipulation, I don't own a scanner myself, so I can't contribute much in this regard... Anyway, it's just a suggestion, so feel free to refuse if you can't or don't want to do it. Thanks in any case.
-
coulonnus
- active poster
- Posts: 1558
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:53 am
- notabot: 42
- notabot2: Human
- Location: Nice, France
- Contact:
Re: Large Score Donation
I volunteer to scan the Schulhoff, Julius scores.
Re: Large Score Donation
Are you still needing someone to scan Gottschalk scores?
-
Eric
- active poster
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:04 pm
- notabot: 42
- notabot2: Human
- Location: Ithaca, NY
- Contact:
Re: Large Score Donation
Glad to see the Viole (1825-67) sonatas there, especially since they were not so long ago thought (by e.g. William S. Newman) wholly lost (they've been recorded since their rediscovery - a few years ago (2009) - by John Kersey)... was any decision made about any of these?