Damage caused by Hand-held scanners

[Kyle Harriss]

One of the interesting digitizers out there now is Minolta's "Epic 3000".
(Maybe it's Epic 5000.)   It takes an image from above, and corrects for
spine curvature in the pages...  You don't have to try to hold a book
flat, and there is no abrasion.   This might be one of the better routes
to digitizing manuscripts.   

If the spine curvature thing isn't an issue, then a medium-high quality
digital camera  (not one of those $200-500 units...think $800 to 2,000)
on a photographer's copy stand might be more affordable.  There are
foldable copy stands.

--

Kyle Harriss				kharriss at d.umn.edu
Tech Services 				voice: 218-726-6546
UMD Library				fax:   218-726-8019
Duluth, MN  55812

On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Robert J Tiess wrote:

> Glenn Remelts <remelt at legacy.calvin.edu> writes:
> >My question: Should the archivist be concerned? If not, does
> >anyone know where we can locate a document (or documents)
> >that conclusively says scanning with a hand-held scanner is not
> >harmful. 
> 
> Glenn, it all really depends on the quality (physical, not literary!)
> of the manuscript--if it's fairly degraded or if the paper is of a
> light stock, there is always an excellent chance for a handscanner
> to do some damage--or at worst destroy-- to a manuscript.  This
> very same issue came up when myself and two other librarians
> applied for a grant which would have involved digitizing local
> history materials and making them available via the web for
> a limited time.  Unfortunately, the grant, which was statewide and
> of highly competitve nature (aren't they all these days?), did not
> go through.  However, it was a learning experience for all those
> involved, including the primary school teachers who were to
> have worked with us on this project.
> 
> The handscanner's abrasive nature, the physical act of sliding
> plastic over a potentially delicate manuscript, should get any
> archivist concerned.  I would advise that a flatbed scanner be
> used instead: less abrasion.  But with flatbed scanning comes
> the other issue of binding:  As you know, when photocopying
> a document, a book must be opened and pressed against the
> glass.  With bigger books with degraded/damaged binding, this
> could be the last straw for them, and they may incur further
> damage.  The same goes for flatbed scanners.  So, there is still
> something to be concerned for archivists, institutions, et al.
> 
> The new breed of digitizers, digital cameras, seem to be an
> interesting new way of capturing documents.  The higher
> resolution (i.e. most expensive) of the cameras should be
> able to handle OCR from what I have heard.  And that would be
> ideal for manuscripts that are of an extreme physically-delicate
> nature.  I've also read, on this list or elsewhere, there are
> copiers/units that offer gentler book photocopying.  Since
> OCR and copier technology has already merged, archivists of
> old/sensitive manuscripts will have more affordable options in
> the (hopefully) near future.  Minimizing contact and pressure
> on the pages and binding should be paramount to anyone 
> involved in any maniscriptural digitizing situation.
> 
> 				Robert
> 				rjtiess at juno.com
> 
> Robert J. Tiess
> Lib. Tech., Webmaster
> Middletown Thrall Library - http://www.thrall.org
> Literacy Volunteers of America - http://www.thrall.org/lva
> 
>