 |
 |
For a cheap flatbed, nothing beats the Epson Perfection V550 IMO. I've also worked with the Canon CanoScan line, which range from dirt cheap not good machines to cheap ok ones. The biggest problem with the Canon ones is the software, which is not very good and has some "smart" color correction that over corrects. For text that may not matter. Some versions of the software have some trouble with scanning to TIFFs (I don't remember the specifics,) and I've had to scan using the GIMP interface and save. On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 8:12 PM Will Martin <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > First up, thanks for the feedback so far! > > I think I need to give more context. > > First, we're not going to be scanning books with these. We're scanning: > paper. Old loose-leaf paper. Hundreds of boxes of the stuff. Flatbeds > were designed for that exact medium, so although I do like camera-based > systems, I'm leaning towards flatbeds in this instance. > > At the moment, we have two scanners that we can use for this project: an > Indus Bookscanner 9000, and an Epson Expression 10000, a slightly older > model of the one several of you have recommended. Ordinarily that would > be plenty: we have just 3 full-time special collections staff, plus some > student workers. > > The grant was funded through the CARES Act for the purpose of employing > humanities academics who would otherwise be out of a job due to the > pandemic. It got approved, and so now we have 13 people to work on > digital humanities projects, including a fair bit of digitization. > Having just two scanners has suddenly become a major bottleneck.[1] > > Complicating matters, the entire grant process was rushed. The pandemic > hit, Congress went into overdrive and began dishing out money and > wanting it put to use FAST. The NEH thus had a short turnaround time. > We got slightly less than a week to write the grant, at a point when a > large number of the university's staff were furloughed. Writing it fell > on the shoulders of one faculty member, who did her best as fast as she > could. And it worked! It got approved, in the amount of $300K, which > is frankly amazing. > > But as we began looking at it, we discovered that virtually all of the > funds are earmarked for salaries. Technology budgeting was minimal; we > get four laptops and a couple of software licenses out of the grant > money, and that's it. Scanners are not an allowable expense. > > So now we've got a whole lot more people than equipment, and are having > to pull money from other budgets to get the equipment, at a time when > we're anticipating the necessity of budget cuts due to lower enrollment > in fall due to the pandemic. > > So while I would love to get a few more Epson Expressions, I don't think > we can really afford their price point, which hovers around $4K each. > I'm hoping to get away for $1500 or less. > > This whole pandemic thing is awful. > > Will > > [1] I should note we do have more than 2 scanners, it's just the other > ones are in use in public areas, for ILL, or are sheet-fed scanners. We > are leery of feeding irreplaceable documents that are 70+ years old > through those. > -- Andrew Ward (he/him/his) Digital Services Librarian Troy Public Library