On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, gids.rs@sasktel.net wrote:
ONe reason I don't is because that time I saw the broken tripod in the garbage, it was broken, I was blocks away when I realized I should have grabbed the the top of it, to make a mount for my camera to hold it over a desk.Google made a nice system for scanning books, instead of the book lying flat, it's sitting on the scanner like the tip of a pointy roof, or like the top of snoopys dog house. Of course, you'd have to build a scanner for that, lol. =)http://hackaday.com/2012/11/16/google-books-team-open-sources-their-book-scanner/What I don't get is why people are still using scanners at all. I just use my digital camera that saves as a jpeg. Way faster. Way simpler. It can still be OCR'd once the pictures are transfered to the computer.
I like my scanner, and I'm not scanning things with hundreds of pages. But there have definitely been things that don't fit the scanner, and a camera would have worked fine.
The precedence is in the days of "microfilm". Certainly some of the amateur radio and hobby electronic magazines had the occasional article about using a film camera to copy magazines (or parts of books, nobody though in terms of getting rid of books). That was out of the mainstream, but somehow in the digital age scanners made inroads for that sort of thing, leaving cameras generally out of the picture.
MIchael
The book doesn't even have to be opened all the way. A 90 degree angle is sufficient.You can even take the picture parallel to the book, and rotate the picture 90 degrees on the computer. The text and pictures still comes out perfect.Rob