Never Pay for a Photocopy Again

I’ve just started using a CanoScan LiDE 70 to make PDFs of things. I like the fact that it is lightweight, that it works off my plugged-in laptop, and that one can press a book down quite hard in order to ensure that double pages in thick books are legible on the inside margins. Here is an example. The pages are from the TOB, one of my favorite study Bibles.

I don’t like how noisy it is, and I wish it were faster. I wish I knew which portable scanner on the market is the fastest and quietest. That would be the one to get.

UPDATE: Iyov’s follow-up post to his comment below is well worth reading.

 

Comments

[Suzanne]

Hi John,

It looks like Rob Bradshaw started a trend. I scanned this entry. It enlarges nicely and this scanner does a much better job than an all in one, so they told me. The fuzz on the left is because I was being careful with the binding.

[Menachem Mendel]

I was contemplating purchasing this same scanner. I had heard about how loud it can be and decided to hold back and try and pressure the library to get a professional scanner for library use.

[JohnFH]

A research library I use, Raynor of Marquette in Milwaukee, has a surfeit of scanners available for use. Every user-friendly library should have them.

[Tom Reynolds]

Last week Canon announced the LiDE90 so perhaps the noise and speed concerns have been addressed.
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/16070/canon-canoscan-lide90/
I am looking forward to reading some reviews on it.

[Iyov]

I use a medium-end pocket digital camera in the library. Small, fast, silent. I can photograph a 300 page book in about 20 minutes -- a little faster than it takes me to photocopy a book. Conversion to PDF can be done by batch later through Photoshop.

A mini tripod will improve your experience.

[JohnFH]

That's interesting, Iyov. I've never seen anyone do that in a library.

[Menachem Mendel]

This post might be helpful for those who choose Iyov's solution. The comments also have some interesting info.

[Suzanne]

I think the camera would be a better answer. It would be a lot easier on the spines of the book.

[G.M. Grena]

Back in 2002 when I began my LMLK research, I took my 2Mp camera to each library I visited & found it to be invaluable compared to time-consuming handwritten notes. It was nearly silent, & I never needed a flash (just an ISO-400 setting). A few years ago I stopped doing it though, & decided to simply buy the books I needed/used the most.

[Todd]

Hi John,

I've enjoyed the blog, especially on Nicholas of Lyra. I use a digital camera for rare books and worked through 2 Tomes of F. Junius' Theologica Opera in about an hour or so (1800 images), no flash and a flourescent light. What's a guy to do when there are only 10 or so copies around the world?