FYI: Adventures in (document) scanning...

[Don Y]

I\'ve got a lot of scanners (they are useful in DTP).
But, until recently, all were effectively \"single sheet\"
devices (even those with feeders weren\'t particularly fast).
They\'ve been more geared to oversized scanning (tabloid as
well as up to 40\" wide media), high resolution (film scanners)
and \"one off\" page scanners (keep a digital record of your
real estate tax assessment, etc.)

A friend recently lent me a \"really fast\" (her words)
scanner (Brother ADS-3600W). This was an eye-opener!

The 3600 will do ~50 sheets per minute, double-sided
(so, 100 \"pages\" per minute). Documents must be reasonably
narrow, though (letter/legal/and smaller -- 8.5\" width)

The feeder will accommodate 50 sheets, though you can add
to it as sheets are processed without interrupting the
flow. This is probably not advised, though (see below).

It has WiFi and a wired 100/1000 NIC. A USB3 port connects
to a PC. A USB port is available to scan directly to a
thumb drive. The UI is via a small, color touch panel.

The only \"supplies\" are replacement rollers (after 200,000
sheets).

I opted for a 2400N which omits the WiFi, downgrades the USB
to USB2 (which can be a bottleneck at higher scanning
resolutions/page sizes) and replaces the touch panel with
a set of programmable LPBs.

[My thinking: considerably cheaper (I paid $150 NIB vs
closer to $400 for the 3600), I don\'t use WiFi and have
wired drops all over the house, I\'m not likely to want to
have a dedicated PC to service this peripheral and 30 vs
50 ppm is a small concession for an activity that I
don\'t plan on performing continuously. Also, a failure
in the touch panel would mean the device would *have*
to be operated from a PC whereas a broken button could
be easily hacked!]

Looseleaf sheets/manuals are easy to process. I\'ve set up one
of the LPBs to signal \"600x600 dpi, 24b color\" and use this
to scan the front and back covers (both sides of each) as
they are often produced in color even if the content is B&W.
A second LPB is set for \"600x600 dpi, monochrome\" (it dithers
well so most greys are reproduced) which I use to scan the
contents of the manual.

[600dpi seems to be about the low end for reliable OCR
post-processing; for documents with very small typefaces,
I scan at 1200x1200. For B-size foldouts, I scan on a
flatbed scanner and import those pages individually to
the document during reassembly.]

Both buttons route their output to an FTP service that
runs, here, 24/7/365 so I can pick up the output without
having to take any special steps. (I will set up a third
option for SWMBO to scan to an SMB share on that same
host as that\'s easier for her to deal with).

Each option causes ALL of the media to be scanned into a single
PDF/A. I believe there are options to create a document per
sheet but that\'s contrary to how I use it (I could always
feed a single sheet in and end up with a single page PDF!)

This choice has consequences; if the scanner gags on anything
(e.g., a jam -- see below), then the entire document is
scrapped. If sheet 49 of a 50 sheet document chokes, then
you have to rescan ALL the previous sheets, again!

[IIRC, the scanner has 256MB of internal memory; 512MB for
the 3600W. I\'ve never encountered a PDF that approaches
that size]

Jams have been an issue, for me, as I have been \"ripping\"
books (I have a large paper \"guillotine\" that cuts off the
binding, converting the book to front+back cover and
a bunch of loose sheets). For perfect bindings, this often
results in some glue being left on the edges of *some* pages
(particularly the pages adjoining the covers -- have a look
see, for yourself!).

If, like me, you try to maximize the paper size fed into
the scanner (to minimize risk of something close to the
binding edge being \"cut off\"), then there is an increased
chance of this glue causing two adjacent pages to stick
together along that edge (the glue often seeps *between*
the pages during the binding process).

Note that the adhesion may be slight, but enough to cause those
two pages to be fed concurrently. The scanner can detect this
change in thickness and inhibit the feed. (if you have a
Post-It note on a page, it will detect that, as well, regardless
of where on the page it is encountered!)

It is surprisingly difficult to ensure that no two sheets are
stuck together, e.g., by \"fanning\" the pages.

Another consequence of this glue residue is that it can
transfer to the front/back CIS in the scanner -- where it
must be removed with a weak solvent (alcohol seems to work).

Once the document/manual/book has been scanned, I fetch the
(multiple) PDFs from the server. Each carries a name of the
form <foo>_<date>_<time>.pdf (this can be changed) so
I know the order in which the files should be reassembled.

Select the files that comprise each document (thumbnails
are helpful to discover the cover of the NEXT document)

Context menu: \"Combine files in Acrobat\"

Acrobat: \"Organize Pages\"
Review pages for any that stand out as \"odd\"
Drag rear cover (recto and verso) to reposition after the last
scanned page. \"Save as Other | PDF/A\"

Every 5,000 sheets (10,000 images), the scanner throws
a \"maintenance alert\" to indicate cleaning is needed.
Wipe out the paper dust, clean the rollers with a damp cloth.
Wait to air dry.

I\'ve not yet had to replace the roller assemblies and
imagine I will largely finish my scanning before that
time comes (200,000 sheets -- 400,000 pages!)

There are lots of other features -- but those likely
only have value in a more traditional \"office\"
(e.g., \"scan-to-email\" as a FAX emulator)

 

[a a]

On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 05:06:23 UTC+2, Don Y wrote:

I\'ve got a lot of scanners (they are useful in DTP).
But, until recently, all were effectively \"single sheet\"
devices (even those with feeders weren\'t particularly fast).
They\'ve been more geared to oversized scanning (tabloid as
well as up to 40\" wide media), high resolution (film scanners)
and \"one off\" page scanners (keep a digital record of your
real estate tax assessment, etc.)

A friend recently lent me a \"really fast\" (her words)
scanner (Brother ADS-3600W). This was an eye-opener!

The 3600 will do ~50 sheets per minute, double-sided
(so, 100 \"pages\" per minute). Documents must be reasonably
narrow, though (letter/legal/and smaller -- 8.5\" width)

The feeder will accommodate 50 sheets, though you can add
to it as sheets are processed without interrupting the
flow. This is probably not advised, though (see below).

It has WiFi and a wired 100/1000 NIC. A USB3 port connects
to a PC. A USB port is available to scan directly to a
thumb drive. The UI is via a small, color touch panel.

The only \"supplies\" are replacement rollers (after 200,000
sheets).

I opted for a 2400N which omits the WiFi, downgrades the USB
to USB2 (which can be a bottleneck at higher scanning
resolutions/page sizes) and replaces the touch panel with
a set of programmable LPBs.

[My thinking: considerably cheaper (I paid $150 NIB vs
closer to $400 for the 3600), I don\'t use WiFi and have
wired drops all over the house, I\'m not likely to want to
have a dedicated PC to service this peripheral and 30 vs
50 ppm is a small concession for an activity that I
don\'t plan on performing continuously. Also, a failure
in the touch panel would mean the device would *have*
to be operated from a PC whereas a broken button could
be easily hacked!]

Looseleaf sheets/manuals are easy to process. I\'ve set up one
of the LPBs to signal \"600x600 dpi, 24b color\" and use this
to scan the front and back covers (both sides of each) as
they are often produced in color even if the content is B&W.
A second LPB is set for \"600x600 dpi, monochrome\" (it dithers
well so most greys are reproduced) which I use to scan the
contents of the manual.

[600dpi seems to be about the low end for reliable OCR
post-processing; for documents with very small typefaces,
I scan at 1200x1200. For B-size foldouts, I scan on a
flatbed scanner and import those pages individually to
the document during reassembly.]

Both buttons route their output to an FTP service that
runs, here, 24/7/365 so I can pick up the output without
having to take any special steps. (I will set up a third
option for SWMBO to scan to an SMB share on that same
host as that\'s easier for her to deal with).

Each option causes ALL of the media to be scanned into a single
PDF/A. I believe there are options to create a document per
sheet but that\'s contrary to how I use it (I could always
feed a single sheet in and end up with a single page PDF!)

This choice has consequences; if the scanner gags on anything
(e.g., a jam -- see below), then the entire document is
scrapped. If sheet 49 of a 50 sheet document chokes, then
you have to rescan ALL the previous sheets, again!

[IIRC, the scanner has 256MB of internal memory; 512MB for
the 3600W. I\'ve never encountered a PDF that approaches
that size]

Jams have been an issue, for me, as I have been \"ripping\"
books (I have a large paper \"guillotine\" that cuts off the
binding, converting the book to front+back cover and
a bunch of loose sheets). For perfect bindings, this often
results in some glue being left on the edges of *some* pages
(particularly the pages adjoining the covers -- have a look
see, for yourself!).

If, like me, you try to maximize the paper size fed into
the scanner (to minimize risk of something close to the
binding edge being \"cut off\"), then there is an increased
chance of this glue causing two adjacent pages to stick
together along that edge (the glue often seeps *between*
the pages during the binding process).

Note that the adhesion may be slight, but enough to cause those
two pages to be fed concurrently. The scanner can detect this
change in thickness and inhibit the feed. (if you have a
Post-It note on a page, it will detect that, as well, regardless
of where on the page it is encountered!)

It is surprisingly difficult to ensure that no two sheets are
stuck together, e.g., by \"fanning\" the pages.

Another consequence of this glue residue is that it can
transfer to the front/back CIS in the scanner -- where it
must be removed with a weak solvent (alcohol seems to work).

Once the document/manual/book has been scanned, I fetch the
(multiple) PDFs from the server. Each carries a name of the
form <foo>_<date>_<time>.pdf (this can be changed) so
I know the order in which the files should be reassembled.

Select the files that comprise each document (thumbnails
are helpful to discover the cover of the NEXT document)

Context menu: \"Combine files in Acrobat\"

Acrobat: \"Organize Pages\"
Review pages for any that stand out as \"odd\"
Drag rear cover (recto and verso) to reposition after the last
scanned page. \"Save as Other | PDF/A\"

Every 5,000 sheets (10,000 images), the scanner throws
a \"maintenance alert\" to indicate cleaning is needed.
Wipe out the paper dust, clean the rollers with a damp cloth.
Wait to air dry.

I\'ve not yet had to replace the roller assemblies and
imagine I will largely finish my scanning before that
time comes (200,000 sheets -- 400,000 pages!)

There are lots of other features -- but those likely
only have value in a more traditional \"office\"
(e.g., \"scan-to-email\" as a FAX emulator)

why do you still scan paper documents if electronic versions are readily available ?

 

[amdx]

On 9/11/2022 10:06 PM, Don Y wrote:

I opted for a 2400N which omits the WiFi, downgrades the USB
to USB2 (which can be a bottleneck at higher scanning
resolutions/page sizes) and replaces the touch panel with
a set of programmable LPBs.

[My thinking:  considerably cheaper (I paid $150 NIB vs
closer to $400 for the 3600), I don\'t use WiFi and have
wired drops all over the house,

When did you buy this? The cheapest I can find it is $349.
                                   Mikek

 

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2022 4:57 AM, amdx wrote:

On 9/11/2022 10:06 PM, Don Y wrote:

I opted for a 2400N which omits the WiFi, downgrades the USB
to USB2 (which can be a bottleneck at higher scanning
resolutions/page sizes) and replaces the touch panel with
a set of programmable LPBs.

[My thinking: considerably cheaper (I paid $150 NIB vs
closer to $400 for the 3600), I don\'t use WiFi and have
wired drops all over the house,
When did you buy this? The cheapest I can find it is $349.

I had been looking around at the different models (there are
4 offerings in that \"family\") at different online vendors,
auction houses, overstock, etc. Eventually, I stumbled on one
listed at 150 (or maybe 160? -- before tax) and that made up
my mind for me. :> As with everything, if you aren\'t
pressed to make a purchase NOW, you have a greater chance
of finding a deal...

When I received it, it had a record of *2* pages scanned (front
and back of ONE sheet of paper; I consider that \"new\" :> )

I don\'t think many people are interested in scanners -- unless
corporate types who need them to process paper in their
front offices (I think this one has an expected usage of 2000pp
per day -- who the hell does that??) When I finish processing
all of my \"paper to discard\", this will likely sit on a shelf.

There are, I believe, 4 devices in the \"family\". The 2400N is
wired network only (no wifi or touch screen). The 3000N is a faster
version (USB3 and 50ppm) also without wifi. Then, the 3600W
(like the 3000 but wifi and touch screen) and maybe a 2800W
(like the 2400 but wifi and touch screen).

At least, that\'s how I remember them.

The driver/utility/etc. is the same for all of them.

You can install the driver in \"direct connected\" (USB) mode
or \"network accessed\". So, install \"direct connect\" on one
machine (as you may need to talk directly to it in order to set
up some defaults, networking, etc.). Then, \"network accessed\"
for all other machines you may have.

[You can access the device\'s configuration via a variety of
protocols: telnet, web server, ftp, etc. but I think a hard-wired
connection is always a nice fall-back. I just never plug the USB
cable in on mine!]

In practice, it\'s easier just to set up the front panel
buttons (2400/3000) and let it *push* the scans to your
desired destination instead of \"babysitting it\" with a PC.

[Note that the USB2 i/f causes the scanner to slow down as it
waits for your PC to accept the scanned images. Thruput
drops markedly. OTOH, scanning to an FTP service (or an SMB
share) has no impact on scanning speed as the i/f runs
faster than the scanner.]

I\'m a little annoyed at the 8.5\" width limitation as I
have some things that exceed that. I may end up buying yet
another device as getting rid of all this paper is
intoxicating -- 60,000 pages (30,000 sheets -- about 3 cartons
of xerox paper), thus far!

[Figure that\'s about 20 hours of work]

 

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2022 5:55 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 9/12/2022 4:57 AM, amdx wrote:

When did you buy this? The cheapest I can find it is $349.

I don\'t think many people are interested in scanners -- unless
corporate types who need them to process paper in their
front offices (I think this one has an expected usage of 2000pp
per day -- who the hell does that??) When I finish processing
all of my \"paper to discard\", this will likely sit on a shelf.

I recall many \"previously used\" units on eBay that were
offered at a low price. But, you have to be wary that
all of the parts are present as I noticed some missing
power supplies (\"bricks\"), others missing the feeder guide
or output collector. There are some odds-and-ends that
might have been misplaced by a previous owner (driver
CD, scanning \"pouch\" for flimsy documents, etc.) but
they\'re likely not essential (driver is available from
web site)

No way to know how many scans are recorded on the rollers
without querying the device. But, a new set of rollers
can be found for as little as $30 (again, if you look hard
as MSRP is closer to $75; I see some on ebay at $40 presently)

No guarantee that something won\'t BREAK soon after purchase
(I have that same problem) but I think the \"planned replacement\"
is the roller assemblies -- for obvious reasons.

[I guess it is also possible that the CIS can be scratched
if abused. But, imagine the more realistic scenario is that
it needs a good cleaning (isopropyl for *just* the CIS,
not the rollers, etc.)]

I\'m a little annoyed at the 8.5\" width limitation as I
have some things that exceed that. I may end up buying yet
another device as getting rid of all this paper is
intoxicating -- 60,000 pages (30,000 sheets -- about 3 cartons
of xerox paper), thus far!

No, it\'s more like *6* cartons as each holds ten 500 sheet reams.

> [Figure that\'s about 20 hours of work]

I initially wanted to have ~10,000 pages of manuals scanned
by a service bureau. But, they quoted me $300 -- which got
me looking into rolling my own solution. That was The Right
Choice, for me, as it has enabled me to get rid of a LOT of
paper!

(and I haven\'t even started on financial records, project notes,
etc.)

 

[amdx]

On 9/12/2022 7:55 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 9/12/2022 4:57 AM, amdx wrote:
On 9/11/2022 10:06 PM, Don Y wrote:

I opted for a 2400N which omits the WiFi, downgrades the USB
to USB2 (which can be a bottleneck at higher scanning
resolutions/page sizes) and replaces the touch panel with
a set of programmable LPBs.

[My thinking:  considerably cheaper (I paid $150 NIB vs
closer to $400 for the 3600), I don\'t use WiFi and have
wired drops all over the house,
When did you buy this? The cheapest I can find it is $349.

 As with everything, if you aren\'t
pressed to make a purchase NOW, you have a greater chance
of finding a deal...


I don\'t think many people are interested in scanners

 I don\'t need a scanner often, but it comes in handy on occasion.
The one I have  (HP3150) is 16 yrs old, it no longer prints and  is
getting very flakey to
even do a scan anymore. The last time I tried, I failed and just took a
picture of the document,
 and emailed it, that sufficed.
 I also have a Brother Laserjet 1012 also very near the same age. I had
to find a Brother software update
several years ago, that was a hack and works almost all the time. So I\'m
ready for a new printer/scanner, as these
have paid their dues. Not sure I need color and have been very happy
with my Blk/wht Laserjet, and toner rather than color print cartridges.
 Have they got any better in the last 16 years?
                        Mikek

 

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2022 6:53 AM, amdx wrote:

I don\'t need a scanner often, but it comes in handy on occasion.
The one I have (HP3150) is 16 yrs old, it no longer prints and is getting
very flakey to
even do a scan anymore. The last time I tried, I failed and just took a picture
of the document,
and emailed it, that sufficed.
I also have a Brother Laserjet 1012 also very near the same age. I had to
find a Brother software update
several years ago, that was a hack and works almost all the time. So I\'m ready
for a new printer/scanner, as these
have paid their dues. Not sure I need color and have been very happy with my
Blk/wht Laserjet, and toner rather than color print cartridges.
Have they got any better in the last 16 years?

I refuse to use inkjets; the ink is more expensive than cocaine!

And, I\'m not keen on the \"all-in-one\" printer/scanner/fax boxes.

For \"low frequency\" printing, I have a pair of LaserJet 5p/6p.
I paid $10 for each of them and have only had to purchase one toner
cartridge (I subsequently rescued 3 NIB so I figure I\'m set for life!)

I discarded all of my color printers -- Phasers, color laserjets,
a wide-format inkjet, etc. and now walk to the local Kinkos
when I need a *quality* color print (or, need to print on my
own paper/cardstock). If I just want a color print, the local
library will do it for 10c/sheet -- hard to beat that price!

[I think I still have a color \"photo printer\", somewhere -- it
doesn\'t see much use as I\'m not big on having hard-copies of
photos lying around]

Prior to this scanner, I would use a gravity fed Canon for the
\"one off\" pages that often need to be scanned (e.g., mailing in your
vehicle registration, property tax payment, etc.). Anything
larger (B-size) I have a pair of \"tabloid\" scanners to accommodate.

For film (35mm, 4x6, etc.) I have a film scanner (very high resolution).
And, for really big documents (E-size), I have a wide-format scanner.
(I think I may have forgotten one or two -- I have WAY too much \"stuff\"!)

Having separate \"appliances\" is tedious in some cases (e.g., if I
want to make a *copy* of something, I have to scan it and then *print*
it; but, I can print that anywhere, not just on the machine that
happened to do the scan). If I was doing that sort of thing more
often, then I\'d look for an even nicer scanner (and printer).

Unless you need instant access to scans or prints, consider a
local service bureau. I got so tired of having to maintain
the color printers for the infrequent use I made of them!

The B&W laserjets, OTOH, have some utility as often you may want to
just get a hard-copy of a web page -- that you may end up discarding
a day later. I\'d hate to have to make a trip to the library just
to pick up a single sheet of paper!

 

[a a]

On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 16:18:32 UTC+2, Don Y wrote:

On 9/12/2022 6:53 AM, amdx wrote:
I don\'t need a scanner often, but it comes in handy on occasion.
The one I have (HP3150) is 16 yrs old, it no longer prints and is getting
very flakey to
even do a scan anymore. The last time I tried, I failed and just took a picture
of the document,
and emailed it, that sufficed.
I also have a Brother Laserjet 1012 also very near the same age. I had to
find a Brother software update
several years ago, that was a hack and works almost all the time. So I\'m ready
for a new printer/scanner, as these
have paid their dues. Not sure I need color and have been very happy with my
Blk/wht Laserjet, and toner rather than color print cartridges.
Have they got any better in the last 16 years?
I refuse to use inkjets; the ink is more expensive than cocaine!

And, I\'m not keen on the \"all-in-one\" printer/scanner/fax boxes.

For \"low frequency\" printing, I have a pair of LaserJet 5p/6p.
I paid $10 for each of them and have only had to purchase one toner
cartridge (I subsequently rescued 3 NIB so I figure I\'m set for life!)

I discarded all of my color printers -- Phasers, color laserjets,
a wide-format inkjet, etc. and now walk to the local Kinkos
when I need a *quality* color print (or, need to print on my
own paper/cardstock). If I just want a color print, the local
library will do it for 10c/sheet -- hard to beat that price!

[I think I still have a color \"photo printer\", somewhere -- it
doesn\'t see much use as I\'m not big on having hard-copies of
photos lying around]

Prior to this scanner, I would use a gravity fed Canon for the
\"one off\" pages that often need to be scanned (e.g., mailing in your
vehicle registration, property tax payment, etc.). Anything
larger (B-size) I have a pair of \"tabloid\" scanners to accommodate.

For film (35mm, 4x6, etc.) I have a film scanner (very high resolution).
And, for really big documents (E-size), I have a wide-format scanner.
(I think I may have forgotten one or two -- I have WAY too much \"stuff\"!)

Having separate \"appliances\" is tedious in some cases (e.g., if I
want to make a *copy* of something, I have to scan it and then *print*
it; but, I can print that anywhere, not just on the machine that
happened to do the scan). If I was doing that sort of thing more
often, then I\'d look for an even nicer scanner (and printer).

Unless you need instant access to scans or prints, consider a
local service bureau. I got so tired of having to maintain
the color printers for the infrequent use I made of them!

The B&W laserjets, OTOH, have some utility as often you may want to
just get a hard-copy of a web page -- that you may end up discarding
a day later. I\'d hate to have to make a trip to the library just
to pick up a single sheet of paper!

line scanner is a thing of the past

Google has scanned thousands of books with a page-turning high-resolution camera system

High-resolution camera in your smartphone can work as a scanner for paper documents.

Don\'t waste your money for 30 years old line scanner technology

 

[server]

a a <manta103g@gmail.com> wrote in
news:e1e75d4b-2375-4c75-90e5-af59d26e524an@googlegroups.com:

why do you still scan paper documents if electronic versions are
readily available ?

Why do you show everyone that you have zero logical process skills
with every post you make.

You can tell us... what nym did you use two months ago?

 

[Bertrand Sindri]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

a a <manta103g@gmail.com> wrote in
news:e1e75d4b-2375-4c75-90e5-af59d26e524an@googlegroups.com:

why do you still scan paper documents if electronic versions are
readily available ?

Why do you show everyone that you have zero logical process skills
with every post you make.

You can tell us... what nym did you use two months ago?

Possibly the A a troll was posting as the John Dope troll two months
ago.

 

[a a]

On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 20:51:37 UTC+2, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
#hellolowbrainer

 

[a a]

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 00:06:42 UTC+2, Bertrand Sindri wrote:
--line scanner is a thing of the past

Google has scanned thousands of books with a page-turning high-resolution camera system

High-resolution camera in your smartphone can work as a scanner for paper documents.

Don\'t waste your money for 30 years old line scanner technology

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 7:18:32 AM UTC-7, Don Y wrote:

Unless you need instant access to scans or prints, consider a
local service bureau. I got so tired of having to maintain
the color printers for the infrequent use I made of them!

Good point. In the early digital-photography days, Kodak put
up kiosks everywhere, with good high-quality digital print, AND
they serviced them, so Kodak-quality-control inks and papers
would reliably be used.

Then Kodak corporation imploded... some of those kiosks
are still around, but there\'s foibles that stopped or sidelined
the process, last time I visited one. I could find, and print,
most (but not all) of my picture files. Print quality is still
good, but the software needs updates.

 

[John Walliker]

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 13:14:47 UTC+1, a a wrote:

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 00:06:42 UTC+2, Bertrand Sindri wrote:
--line scanner is a thing of the past
Google has scanned thousands of books with a page-turning high-resolution camera system

High-resolution camera in your smartphone can work as a scanner for paper documents.

Don\'t waste your money for 30 years old line scanner technology

Total nonsense. Have you ever tried using a smartphone camera to scan documents?
The results are nowhere near as good and it takes longer. (Yes I have tried it.)

John

 

[a a]

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 19:50:08 UTC+2, John Walliker wrote:

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 13:14:47 UTC+1, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 00:06:42 UTC+2, Bertrand Sindri wrote:
--line scanner is a thing of the past
Google has scanned thousands of books with a page-turning high-resolution camera system

High-resolution camera in your smartphone can work as a scanner for paper documents.

Don\'t waste your money for 30 years old line scanner technology


John

call Google and ask them how did they scan millions of books
with overhead camera

High resolution camera coming with your smartphone is DIY scanner you can set up on-the-fly,
live supported by OCR software run on your smartphone.

Have a try and stop your fooling comments

 

[John Walliker]

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 19:35:39 UTC+1, a a wrote:

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 19:50:08 UTC+2, John Walliker wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 13:14:47 UTC+1, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 00:06:42 UTC+2, Bertrand Sindri wrote:
--line scanner is a thing of the past
Google has scanned thousands of books with a page-turning high-resolution camera system

High-resolution camera in your smartphone can work as a scanner for paper documents.

Don\'t waste your money for 30 years old line scanner technology


John
call Google and ask them how did they scan millions of books
with overhead camera

High resolution camera coming with your smartphone is DIY scanner you can set up on-the-fly,
live supported by OCR software run on your smartphone.

Have a try and stop your fooling comments

Google do not use a smartphone camera. Scanning books requires a lot of
attention to details. The usual method when the book must be preserved intact
is to have an inverted V-shaped glass structure that forces the pages to be flat
without breaking the spine of the book. If the book can be destroyed, then the
spine can be removed and the scanning becomes much more conventional
as described by Don Y.
Getting the uniformity and angle of the lighting right is also important. Again,
this is very difficult to do well with a smartphone.

John

 

[a a]

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 22:14:20 UTC+2, John Walliker wrote:

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 19:35:39 UTC+1, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 19:50:08 UTC+2, John Walliker wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 13:14:47 UTC+1, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 00:06:42 UTC+2, Bertrand Sindri wrote:
--line scanner is a thing of the past
Google has scanned thousands of books with a page-turning high-resolution camera system

High-resolution camera in your smartphone can work as a scanner for paper documents.

Don\'t waste your money for 30 years old line scanner technology


John
call Google and ask them how did they scan millions of books
with overhead camera

High resolution camera coming with your smartphone is DIY scanner you can set up on-the-fly,
live supported by OCR software run on your smartphone.

Have a try and stop your fooling comments
Google do not use a smartphone camera. Scanning books requires a lot of
attention to details. The usual method when the book must be preserved intact
is to have an inverted V-shaped glass structure that forces the pages to be flat
without breaking the spine of the book. If the book can be destroyed, then the
spine can be removed and the scanning becomes much more conventional
as described by Don Y.
Getting the uniformity and angle of the lighting right is also important. Again,
this is very difficult to do well with a smartphone.

John

Infrared camera technology
Turns out, Google created some seriously nifty infrared camera technology that detects the three-dimensional shape and angle of book pages when the book is placed in the scanner. This information is transmitted to the OCR software, which adjusts for the distortions and allows the OCR software to read text more accurately.
The Secret Of Google\'s Book Scanning Machine Revealed
www.npr.org/sections/library/2009/04/the_granting_of_patent_7508978.html
www.npr.org/sections/library/2009/04/the_granting_of_patent_7508978.html


How does Google\'s open book scanning work?
How can I scan Google Books for specific words?
How to scan Google Drive?
How many books has Google scanned so far?

How Google Scans Books - Business Insider
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-google-scans-books-2009-5

So instead of manually pushing books against a glass plate or slicing the binding off, Google uses an infrared projector and stereo camera to determine the curvature of a book\'s …
How does Google physically scan all those books? - Quora
https://www.quora.com/How-does-Google-physically-scan-all-those-books

The scanning process involves a stereoscopic vision system comprised of an infrared projector which projects a pattern onto a book, and multiple infrared cameras that …
Scan documents with Google Drive - Android - Google …
https://support.google.com/drive/answer/3145835

Overview
Scan a document
Add a scanning shortcut to your Home screen

1. Open the Google Drive app .
2. In the bottom right, tap Add .
3. Tap Scan .
4. Take a photo of the document you\'d like to scan.

: support.google.com
Scan documents with Google Drive - Computer - Google …
https://support.google.com/drive/answer/3145835?hl...

Scan documents with Google Drive. Scan documents like receipts, letters, and billing statements to save them as searchable PDFs on your Google Drive. Computer Android …
How Google Books Works | HowStuffWorks
https://computer.howstuffworks.com/google-books.htm


Workers simply place the book on an open book scanner that has neither a glass plate nor any other equipment that would flatten a book. Google\'s advanced software scans the book and …
What Happened to Google\'s Effort to Scan Millions of
https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-08-10-what...

10.08.2017 · Taking into account multi-volume journals and duplicate copies, that’s about 8 million unique items, about 95 percent of them from Google’s scanning. The rest come …
Mail your books for scanning - Google Play Books Partner …
https://support.google.com/books/partner/answer/3297525

Mail your books for scanning Although the fastest way to submit your book is to provide digital files, established partners can also submit hard copies which Google will scan and add to their...
Patent reveals Google\'s book-scanning advantage - CNET
https://www.cnet.com/science/patent-reveals-google...

04.05.2009 · This pattern can be shown on the book with infrared light; infrared cameras photograph it to deduce the 3D shape of the pages. Google First, the book is placed on a …

 

[Don Y]

On 9/13/2022 10:37 AM, whit3rd wrote:

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 7:18:32 AM UTC-7, Don Y wrote:

Unless you need instant access to scans or prints, consider a
local service bureau. I got so tired of having to maintain
the color printers for the infrequent use I made of them!

Good point. In the early digital-photography days, Kodak put
up kiosks everywhere, with good high-quality digital print, AND
they serviced them, so Kodak-quality-control inks and papers
would reliably be used.

Then Kodak corporation imploded... some of those kiosks
are still around, but there\'s foibles that stopped or sidelined
the process, last time I visited one. I could find, and print,
most (but not all) of my picture files. Print quality is still
good, but the software needs updates.

I don\'t rely on any of my cameras for quality *color* reproduction.
Instead, I use a scanner and calibrate it (IT8 targets) just prior
to use (cuz things \"drift\").

I can similarly calibrate a printer (though you start stacking up
errors).

And, have a gizmo that lets me calibrate *my* monitors. But, that
does nothing to ensure *your* monitor displays *my* photo correctly!

But, calibrating a camera is a crap shoot; you also have to deal
with the lighting (which is hard to control unless you have a
light box AND a repeatable way of positioning the camera wrt
the subject), alignment of camera to subject, etc.

[When SWMBO wants a photo of some piece of art that she\'s made,
if possible, I use a flatbed scanner -- and remind her that there
is no guarantee that the folks she is sending it to will see it\'
the same way *she* sees the original!]

I use cameras for informal documentation -- like to show someone
that a blood orange is a different color than a \"regular\" orange
(I don\'t expect their monitor to accurately reproduce ANY of these
colors but, hopefully, show a notable difference)

But, this is a helluvalot of work that you can often outsource.
Let someone else maintain their printers, scanners, etc. and
just \"rent them\".

 

[Don Y]

On 9/13/2022 1:14 PM, John Walliker wrote:

Google do not use a smartphone camera. Scanning books requires a lot of
attention to details. The usual method when the book must be preserved intact
is to have an inverted V-shaped glass structure that forces the pages to be flat
without breaking the spine of the book. If the book can be destroyed, then the
spine can be removed and the scanning becomes much more conventional
as described by Don Y.
Getting the uniformity and angle of the lighting right is also important. Again,
this is very difficult to do well with a smartphone.

When the first Reading Machines were designed, COTS scanners weren\'t
available. So, we had to build our own. This was a 512 element CCD
oriented *vertically* (instead of horizontally) on an X-Y mechanism of
our own creation. (much slower than a modern flatbed scanner but, then
again, you were ultimately limited to how quickly it could *speak* so
little value to capturing images faster than you can analyze them!
Esp when you only had ~32KW of core for CODE+DATA)

One of the primary design criteria was to be able to put an existing book
(which may be of varied thickness) opened to *any* page on the scanner
and ensure that the camera/sensor could peer deep into the binding edge
lest it \"miss\" some content.

<https://medium.com/illuminifytech/where-it-all-began-the-kurzweil-reading-machine-fed89accc6c7>

If you look at most modern *flatbed* scanners, this isn\'t possible. And
definitely not possible with gravity fed, sheet scanners!

If you look at fixed camera scanners, you have an even worse problem
as few bindings are *designed* to \"lie flat\" (these are discarded quite
often at local auctions as they take up more space than a \"sheet scanner\"
and offer little in return)

Finally, you want a mechanism that can feed pages as fast as the scanner
can capture them. If you have to flip pages in a book, you\'ll spend a *day*
trying to scan just one book!

(I scan > 2000 pages daily; > 1000 sheets that would have to be \"fed\"
into a scanner \"by hand\". Ain\'t gonna happen!)

 

[a a]

On Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 01:01:07 UTC+2, Don Y wrote:

On 9/13/2022 1:14 PM, John Walliker wrote:
Google do not use a smartphone camera. Scanning books requires a lot of
attention to details. The usual method when the book must be preserved intact
is to have an inverted V-shaped glass structure that forces the pages to be flat
without breaking the spine of the book. If the book can be destroyed, then the
spine can be removed and the scanning becomes much more conventional
as described by Don Y.
Getting the uniformity and angle of the lighting right is also important. Again,
this is very difficult to do well with a smartphone.
When the first Reading Machines were designed, COTS scanners weren\'t
available. So, we had to build our own. This was a 512 element CCD
oriented *vertically* (instead of horizontally) on an X-Y mechanism of
our own creation. (much slower than a modern flatbed scanner but, then
again, you were ultimately limited to how quickly it could *speak* so
little value to capturing images faster than you can analyze them!
Esp when you only had ~32KW of core for CODE+DATA)

One of the primary design criteria was to be able to put an existing book
(which may be of varied thickness) opened to *any* page on the scanner
and ensure that the camera/sensor could peer deep into the binding edge
lest it \"miss\" some content.

https://medium.com/illuminifytech/where-it-all-began-the-kurzweil-reading-machine-fed89accc6c7

If you look at most modern *flatbed* scanners, this isn\'t possible. And
definitely not possible with gravity fed, sheet scanners!

If you look at fixed camera scanners, you have an even worse problem
as few bindings are *designed* to \"lie flat\" (these are discarded quite
often at local auctions as they take up more space than a \"sheet scanner\"
and offer little in return)

Finally, you want a mechanism that can feed pages as fast as the scanner
can capture them. If you have to flip pages in a book, you\'ll spend a *day*
trying to scan just one book!

(I scan > 2000 pages daily; > 1000 sheets that would have to be \"fed\"
into a scanner \"by hand\". Ain\'t gonna happen!)

The Kurzweil Machine at University of Illinois-UC

https://miro.medium.com/max/400/1*VEIWyxjLN4nCCwm6wGwAUQ.jpeg

https://medium.com/illuminifytech/where-it-all-began-the-kurzweil-reading-machine-fed89accc6c7

Kurzweil : as I recall him from the past years, once a big name