Read more episodes of “So, You’re A Cartoonist?” here: [link]
Everywhere I've looked art paper is 9x12, and yet your average scanner only scans 8.5x11. That just seems silly to me...
EDIT: Yes I am aware they make scanners which can scan larger than 8.5x11. But they are also expensive and I can't afford one right now just like I can't afford a Cintiq 21UX.
EDIT: Yes I am ALSO aware you can scan your large image in chunks and stitch them together, which is what I do (duh). Still doesn't stop it from being an "inconvenience" though...
EDIT: Yes I am ALSO aware you can simply "take a picture of it" with your camera. While there's nothing wrong with doing that, I personally wouldn't trust using a photograph as my line-art source. I need high crystal clear resolution, something which using my current camera isn't going to achieve.
EDIT: Yes you can just take it to Kinko's or Staples or some other sort of office/print store and get it scanned on one of their nice big scanners... but that costs money and still is an "inconvenience"
EDIT: Yes I am aware you could also cut down the paper to the appropriate size.
EDIT: Yes I am aware that I could just use copy paper.
EDIT: Yes I am aware that there are other brands other than Epson.
EDIT: Yes I am aware these multiple edits are getting out of hand.
EDIT: Yes I am aware that setting the scanner on fire is going to rob me of my ability to print.
Seriously guys, there's like a million different ways to get around this challenge effectively. But the point I was trying to make is that ALL of that could be avoided IF the industry just made art paper 8.5x11 instead of 9x12.