Jump to content
LauraB

photography Best Scanner (Scansnap) to digitize 10,000 photo prints?

Recommended Posts

What is the best scanner to digitize 10,000 photos? Want to upload some to Evernote as well. Does anyone use Evernote to back up photos in conjunction with another photo app?

Share this post


Link to post

What is the best scanner to digitize 10,000 photos? Want to upload some to Evernote as well. Does anyone use Evernote to back up photos in conjunction with another photo app?

I prefer to keep my digital photos & scans of photos OUT of EN. Instead, they are all on a hard drive, organized with ACDSee Photo Manager & backed up to a cloud via Jungle Disk.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I wasn't planning to upload all my pics to Evernote, just certain ones for specific projects I am working on where I am collecting certain images for a project and I can organize them there in folders until I need to proceed with the project.

I am thinking of getting the Fujitsu ScanSnap™ S1100 Deluxe Colour Scanner and wondering if that's better for photos than say, the Fujitsu Scansnap S1300i Duplex Colour Scanner ... which should I get is the question.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I wasn't planning to upload all my pics to Evernote, just certain ones for specific projects I am working on where I am collecting certain images for a project and I can organize them there in folders until I need to proceed with the project.

I am thinking of getting the Fujitsu ScanSnap™ S1100 Deluxe Colour Scanner and wondering if that's better for photos than say, the Fujitsu Scansnap S1300i Duplex Colour Scanner ... which should I get is the question.

 

I have the 1300 and I have been pleased with the photos I've used it to scan. It is very slow scanning them, but the detail is good. 

Share this post


Link to post

Totally depends on the quality you want out of a scanner. If quality doesn't matter then I recommend the Doxie scanner which I have. It is one of, if not the cheapest scanners and only one sided which is obviously all you need for photos. Plus it is a battery device and does not need to be connected to your computer to scan. So you can be sat down watching TV and processing your photos.

The Scansnap 1300, which I also have is a superb scanner but better suited for documents that are double sided which is where it's strengths lie. However it would be good enough for photos and a good all rounder.

If quality is important as well as speed then I use and recommend the Epson V700 which allows you to scan multiple photos on the flat bed.

BnF, I like the sound of Jungle Disk, but I have about 110,000 photos, a lot of which are RAW files from Nikon full frame professional cameras so they take up nearly 2TB of space!

Regards

Chris

Share this post


Link to post

Be careful using an auto-fed scanner to scan photos. It's possible that your photos could become scratched as they're dragged past the scanner's glass surface.

 

On a cloud storage note, I recently started using Arq on my Mac to backup photos to Amazon's Glacier service. It only costs $0.01 per GB per month to store data (retrieval costs vary...). There are programs for Windows that are equivalent to Arq out there, but I can't vouch for them.

 

--Greg

Share this post


Link to post

(Hmm.. moral issue... do I threadjack, or be shown politely to the search feature...?)

 

Threadjack it is! ;)

 

How much more efficient are the new photo scanners than the old late
90s -- early 2000 era scanners?  I have 2 old scanners but barely got
any use out of them because I've yet to find a software interface that
isn't clunky as can be as well as the painful speed of the devices.

 

That said, I'd be willing to endure if I had to -- so if you guys don't
think the new generation is worth the cost (since most are geared toward
document slurping around here), can you at least recommend some
scanning software with a painless interface if I should stick with what I have?

Share this post


Link to post

(Hmm.. moral issue... do I threadjack, or be shown politely to the search feature...?)

 

Threadjack it is! ;)

 

How much more efficient are the new photo scanners than the old late

90s -- early 2000 era scanners?  I have 2 old scanners but barely got

any use out of them because I've yet to find a software interface that

isn't clunky as can be as well as the painful speed of the devices.

 

That said, I'd be willing to endure if I had to -- so if you guys don't

think the new generation is worth the cost (since most are geared toward

document slurping around here), can you at least recommend some

scanning software with a painless interface if I should stick with what I have?

 

 

Depends entirely on what you want to scan. Refer to my note above.

 

In terms of quality, then the newer scanners seem to work much simpler. If it is photographic work then I would definitely go for the Epson as I have recommended, this is an awesome scanner that won't let you down. Also recommended by a lot of photography groups I am part of.

 

Best regards

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the feedback..  I'm coming mostly from "a box of family photos" (point and shoot) spanning 4-5 decades standpoint and preserving as much as possible; Not just for online photo album sharing, but also  not to a pro published photographer's standards.  I'm sure a select bunch of them might be printed off (or doubled in size at the most in a rare case or two), but the printing would be done on consumer grade inkjets or Walgreens at the most (of course in 10 years that might not be as bad as it sounds).  (edit)

 

That Epson looks amazing but probably overkill for me.  I guess I'll start there and work my way down the models until something hits my price/usage ratio. 

 

The way I saw it before, (and I'm probably dead wrong on this) if the photos weren't taken with "all-or-nothing" (top-of-the-line of the affordable consumer teir equipment), there really would be no need to scan with all-or-nothing equipment. The color representation, etc. was surely already way off on all of those random click cameras and cheap photo centers just as much as a 300 dollar scanner from 1999.  I assume that is most likely my ignorance talking, so I'd probably have to wait and get an IPS screen while I'm at it. (edit)

 

Do you know if the people in your groups usually use their  Epson bundled software or any specific 3rd party tools?  I could put up with the old slow flatbed speeds if I could finally find a decent software interface.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Bill,

 

No, I think that with most of them, quality is key, so using a higher quality scanner ie a new one is important.

 

I should point out that you can take a photograph of a photograph and as long as you can get the set up right with regards to light and positioning you can get very high quality. If you get it 100% there is a debate that says this is the best way to import old photos. But it is obviously time consuming. Might be worth a little experimentation if you are on a budget.

 

Best regards

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...