Portable Scanner Solutions for Research?

Fished asks: "Lately, I'm finding that I need to do a lot of research in Libraries -- remember those? I'm tired of feeding dimes to the copiers, and would like to buy some kind of portable scanner to go with my Powerbook. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find one that will work. Back in the eighties, this were as common as dirt: they were small, four inch wide scanners that you could run over the page. Also, while I've found three portable scanners for PC's (from Antec and Pentax) even if I could somehow get them to work with Mac OS X, they are sheet-fed, which is useless for scanning pages out of books. Does anyone still make the old-fashioned Hand Scanners, and do they make them for Macs?"

Comments

HP CapShare

[ChaoticPenguin]

Several years ago, HP ha a product called CapShare. A really cool handheld scanner that has an on-device LCD screen that you can perform simple functions like editing, rotating, etc. with. You can then transfer via infrared to your laptop or, better, to a printer! Unfortunately, this product has now been discontinued. I used it for a while, and it was great, except for one thing -- most of the pages that I need to scan from the library are bound -- and the words near the spine tend to become unreadable...

Logitech

[DBordello]

Logitech use to make them. I am not sure if they still do (doubt it). It was black and white and about 6in wide. I never really liked it much, the software sucked at combining multiple swipes into one fluid page. It was TWAIN compatible. If you do manage to find one, I am sure it will run on the linux distro that I know you have on your Mac :)

Re:Logitech

[jdreed1024]

These were called the "ScanMan". They came in color, B&W, and Hi-Res (600dpi!) versions. They were quite useful, for their size, but the Mac versions were often bulky, had a SCSI interface (which use that stupid HDI-30 connector on powerbooks, if you have a powerbook that had a SCSI connector), and required a separate interface box for the A/C adapter and SCSI connector.

I have one which I'll gladly sell to you. :-)

That having been said, get a Logitech QuickCam 2000 (or QuickCam Pro). It's USB, it's small, it's a good resolution, it comes with a small desktop tripod. The advantage is that in addition to using it to take pictures of printed matter, you can use it to take pictures of the microfilm reader displays. You can't do that with a scanner. It paid for itself twice-over when I did a research project two years ago. On the downside, however, it doesn't work with Linux (AFAICT) or MacOS.

Re:Logitech

[unitron]

I've got a Logitech Scanman that I picked up used a few years ago. Anyone got a copy of Windows 1.x or 2.x so that I can actually use it? Maybe then I could use my brother's old Logitech mouse as well.

Don't by anything from Logitech if you ever want to update any of your software.

Re:Logitech

[jdreed1024]

I've got a Logitech Scanman that I picked up used a few years ago. Anyone got a copy of Windows 1.x or 2.x so that I can actually use it? Maybe then I could use my brother's old Logitech mouse as well. Don't by anything from Logitech if you ever want to update any of your software.

<HUMOR> I've got a Seagate MFM hard drive that I picked up used a few years ago. Anyone got an IBM XT so that I can actually use it? Maybe then I could use my Dell CGA monitor as well. Don't buy anything from Seagate or Dell if you ever want to update any of your software. </HUMOR>

Re:Logitech

[unitron]

Actually you could probably put that drive and an MFM controller board into your newest motherboard that still has an ISA slot and use it. I'll have to dig out one of my old MFM's or RLL's and try it.

My problem with Logitech is that the products aren't really different from the newer ones, they just can't be bothered to provide updated drivers, which prematurely orphans the hardware.

Use a digital camera.

[scott1853]

Seriously. My GF has used ours to take pictures of the monitor when 98 locked up while she was writing letters.

A 2MP should probably work just fine, and if you have a laptop with you, just upload them, erase the card and grab another x pages.

Re:Use a digital camera.

[CreepyNinja]

Damn straight, just cut out the middle-man.

It is interesting to see that scanner prices have dropped with better and better digicams going on the market. It's portable, you have less resolution lost, and it's faster thanks to firewire.

Re:Use a digital camera.

[Anonymous Coward]

OCR software works with tiffs or jpegs just like the ones from digital cameras. Might want to convert to b&w first though

Re:Use a digital camera.

[dasmegabyte]

Acutally, this isn't such a bad idea. Get a nice camera with macro and you're much more likely to get a high res readable image than you are with a hand scanner. Those things like to skew off their wheels and are no good for use with big books (spine) or older books (they touch the page...not something you want when doing research in century old issues of "Punch" magazine).

I've resisted buying a scanner for a long time due to their bulk and my tendency to have a clutter filled desk. Digital cameras are great for recording tax documents and carbon copies of letters where the gist is more important that a high dpi reproduction of the original.

Just do yourself this favour: don't use the flash! Instead, take the shot from high up with florescent lighting. Close up flash on bright paper is a good way to end up with unreadable images, and reading is fundamental to this project.

Re:Use a digital camera.

[Schnapple]

you do realize of course that, walking into a library, finding a book and taking a picture of it will make you look like a wannabe spy? Hey, that could be fun - top it off with a trenchcoat, fedora and sunglasses. And go for a book like Mein Kampf or something. Hilarity will ensue...

Re:Use a digital camera.

[Arcturax]

Good advice. Another reason not to use the flash is you will greatly extend battery life while using it.

I also suggest setting it to high compression and to black and white mode. You will then be able to store thousands of shots on a 128 MB card (or hundreds at 32 or 64). That and turn down the resolution a bit, to about 1.3 MP should be good enough. This might save you from having to lug a heavy laptop along with you.

Re:Digital Camera + OCR

[kalidasa]

Ah, yes, the digital version of the Hogan's Heroes approach.

obviously google can answer this question

[Leimy]

why do people post this stuff?? Search Ebay... google... you have an internet connection... I know you do you lazy bastard!!!

Re:obviously google can answer this question

[dildatron]

what are you talking about?

Jesus Tits

[kuroth]

Try Google

What's next? "Ask Slashdot: Getting Drops Off My Cock After Pissing"?

Re:Jesus Tits

[Psmylie]

I would recommend the Ronco (tm) Electric Penis Dryer (patent pending).

Re:Jesus Tits

[Didion Sprague]

What I'd like to know is what the fuck is up with guys who step waaaaay back from the urinal and then whip-whacks the drips off so everybody and his brother (a) gets a unpleasant glimpse of limp pecker and (b) gets an ass-spatter if they're standing in the wrong place.

Cripes.

But to answer your question: I, too, recommend a digital camera. I use a Nikon Coolpix 900 and it focusses just fine on text. I have to steady myself with my elbows, but 95% of the shots are at least legible.

OCR is a good idea.

Me, I just use the camera technique for getting free porn from the library when I go up to the periodical desk, request the latest Playboy, and then go find a carrol that's out of the way so I can start snapping.

Re:Jesus Tits

[Dr Caleb]

...the Ronco (tm) Electric Penis Dryer...

Typical Americans. Spend a billion to develop a pen that will write in space, and the Russians use a pencil.

Spend Millions developing an Electric Penis Dryer(tm) when the rest of the world just uses their pant leg. When will they learn? How many children could have been fed on those development costs?

Think of the children! (not to mention the shocking results of the lab testing on that product!)

Re:Jesus Tits

[MicroBerto]

And remember -- If you shake it more than 3 times, you're officially wackin' it!!

Re:Jesus Tits

[metsfan]

Wrong.

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.h tm

Re:Jesus Tits

[AzrealAO]

Great Urban Legend.

A) NASA didn't invent the pen, Fischer did, and sold it to Nasa, and it didn't cost Billions.

B) Pencils are terrible in space, all the little graphite dust gets into the electronics, causing shorts. Not a good idea on a space craft.

NASA never asked Paul C. Fisher to produce a pen. When the astronauts began to fly, like the Russians, they used pencils, but the leads sometimes broke and became a hazard by floating in the [capsule's] atmosphere where there was no gravity. They could float into an eye or nose or cause a short in an electrical device. In addition, both the lead and the wood of the pencil could burn rapidly in the pure oxygen atmosphere. Paul Fisher realized the astronauts needed a safer and more dependable writing instrument, so in July 1965 he developed the pressurized ball pen, with its ink enclosed in a sealed, pressurized ink cartridge. Fisher sent the first samples to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Director of the Houston Space Center. The pens were all metal except for the ink, which had a flash point above 200C. The sample Space Pens were thoroughly tested by NASA. They passed all the tests and have been used ever since on all manned space flights, American and Russian. All research and developement costs were paid by Paul Fisher. No development costs have ever been charged to the government.

Because of the fire in Apollo 1, in which three Astronauts died, NASA required a writing instrument that would not burn in a 100% oxygen atmosphere. It also had to work in the extreme conditions of outer space:

1. In a vacuum. 2. With no gravity. 3. In hot temperatures of +150C in sunlight and also in the cold shadows of space where the temperatures drop to -120C

(NASA tested the pressurized Space Pens at -50C, but because of the residential [sic] heat in the pen it also writes for many minutes in the cold shadows.)

Fisher spent over one million dollars in trying to perfect the ball point pen before he made his first successful pressurized pens in 1965. Samples were immediately sent to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Manager of the Houston Space Center, where they were thoroughly tested and approved for use in Space in September 1965. In December 1967 he sold 400 Fisher Space Pens to NASA for $2.95 each.

Lead pencils were used on all Mercury and Gemini space flights and all Russian space flights prior to 1968. Fisher Space Pens are more dependable than lead pencils and cannot create the hazard of a broken piece of lead floating through the gravity-less atmosphere. http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.htm

Re:Jesus Tits

[Scratch-O-Matic]

Spend a billion to develop a pen that will write in space, and the Russians use a pencil.

I hate to be an OT stick-in-the-mud, but I've seen this jab quite a bit and I have to respond. Simply put, it's BS. Read about it here.

Re:Jesus Tits

[Dr Caleb]

I realize it's an urban legend, but it's a funny one. Think the Electric Penis Dryer is real? It's a joke! Laugh!

Re:Jesus Tits

[EvanED]

Maybe you could try READING IT... the link is there at the end.

Re:Jesus Tits

[jsprat]

It slices, it dices, it... no wait, that was the Bass-O-Matic.

Ouch!

Re:Jesus Tits

[brad3378]

great post! - I had no idea that was another urban legend.

Too bad they couldn't use crayolas instead ;-)

Re:Jesus Tits

[EvanED]

Citations traditionally follow the material. Perhaps you should look back at your notes from middle-school English class.

Re:Jesus Tits

[vaxer]

the Ronco (tm) Electric Penis Dryer

That's no good to me -- my penis isn't electric.

Re:Jesus Tits

[Fished]

Actually, I am the original poster, and you would be correct. The problem seems to have been that instead of using the phrase "handheld scanner" I used the phrase "hand scanner". The latter is what they were called back in the eighties, but is apparently now technical argot for a bar-code scanner.

I also tried "portable scanner" and "+portable +scanner", etc. The "use google" responses are perpetually lame, because it can sometimes be impossible to find something on google if you don't know exactly what it's called.

Handheld scanners!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Handheld scanners were useless for scanning books. Most books are too wide for a handheld scanner and you have to stitch together your scans - a VERY awkward process. And even if you can scan the whole width of the page, the roller used to detect when the scanner was moving would go off the bottom of the page of the book before you scanned the final line of text!

In short - forget about the handheld scanner idea. They do sell line scanners that read in lines of text at a time if you just need short segments. I suppose you could even take pictures of the pages with the new high megapixel digital cameras.

Re:Handheld scanners!?

[giminy]

But you could just run the scanner sideways (that's what I always did) to make longer "strips" of the pages. Then just fire up your favorite picture editor and do a simple rotate operation.

Still, I'd suggest a decent digital camera. I use mine for books on occassion and it has always worked just peachy. I never tried OCR with the pictures but it might even work...

Re:Handheld scanners!?

[MikeFM]

For a school project I once modified a very simple robotic arm and handheld scanner to fit over a book and precisely scan the entire two pages (that are exposed at one time) in. Then the pages were ran through OCR to convert to text. Only cost about $20 to build since I already had the scanner. It also would flip through the book for me.. essentially being a book scanner. Worked better on heavy paper than thin paper though as sometimes thin pages stuck together.

Re:Handheld scanners!?

[po8]

Not that I'm an expert, but wasn't the stitching software aided? These days, it seems like the whole thing could be auto-stitched without any human intervention...

Check Pricewatch

[graphicartist82]

Pricewatch.com has a whole section for Mac compatible scanners but I didn't see any that were hand-held..

Re:Check Pricewatch

[amokk]

Here's a link to a picture of a funny looking man with a large moustache. I'm posting it as a follow up because they are both equally relavent answers to the question on hand-held scanners.

http://www.peter.com/inline/jimmy.jpeg

Re:Check Pricewatch

[Sludge]

First post I've lolled at. Look at my user id.

Lightweight Flatbeds

[SJS]

Why not go with a lightweight flatbed scanner? It'll fit in a backback, and many of them are powered from the USB/fireware/whatever connection as well.

If you put the scanner at the edge of a table or desk, you can scan pages of books quickly and easily with less distortion than you'd get from a hand-scanner. This may help make up for the slightly less convenient form-factor.

Try the discount/clearance table at your local Office Depot / Staples / Office Supply store. I always see "clearance" scanner there.

I've not actually tried this with my TiBook, so YMMV.

Re:Lightweight Flatbeds

[1010011010]

I think Canon makes a full-page flatbed USB scanner that's powered by the USB connection. That would do the trick.

Re:Lightweight Flatbeds

[mekkab]

Yes, however most laptop users (esp. those in carrels) have access to a plug. Some libraries even have RJ45 Twisted pair jacks to the carrels!

Do people actually use laptops when they aren't plugged in? Most people I know use laptops as portable harddrive/note taking stations- everywhere they need to be used they have acces to a wall plug.

Re:Lightweight Flatbeds

[Tycho]

Make sure that if you do get a scanner see if the scanner uses white LEDs instead of a florescent light. LED scanners almost certainly use less power than florescent light scanners. I can't comment on their image quality, but that doesn't sound like a big concern. In any case the LED scanners are much lighter, much thinner, and I'm not sure but they may be more durable.

Re:Lightweight Flatbeds

[SJS]

But are the flatbed scanners good enough for thick hardcover books? I guess the scans would get messed up near the seam.

Put the scanner near the edge of the table or desk. Hang the unscanned-part of the book over the edge (you'll have to be careful to hold the book in place). This will eliminate much of the distortion that comes from trying to spread a thick book flat.

The SDSU Library has a couple of photocopiers that do just this sort of thing. It works remarkably well.

Re:Lightweight Flatbeds

[vrmlguy]

Dell Latitude + Cisco Aironet + my backyard = ~2 hours of web-browsing and/or email without a wall plug.

OTOH, my son bought a laptop that didn't include a battery.

Re:Lightweight Flatbeds

[richie2000]

Darn, I've gotta find a good source for Red Dwarf episodes...

On a slightly more on-topic vein, more and more laptops have modular bays that accept batteries - some Compaqs can have up to three batteries in them. Heavy, sure - but if you're lying in a hammock it may be worth it.

CanoScan

[aedan]

Canon make USB powered scanners. They are slim and would easily fit in a briefcase. There are OS X drivers available. I've got at a CanoScan N670U on my iMac and it works fine. There is X OCR software available but I don't have any.

aedan

Re:Digital Camera + OCR

[nackrm]

While the digital camera thing would work, I doubt anyone would seriously want to go through the hassle of getting OCR to work right. For that you'd have to almost set up a tripod to get perfect uniform pictures. While I haven't tried anything like this, I can imagine all of the problems with the recognition of text. Reading or printing the images when done should be fine for most people. That or you could always try to find an online version of the text you use, but I'm sure you've already tried this route, since not everything is online (yet).

Re:Small Flatbed

[CastrTroy]

Cannon makes a nice small flatbed, called the N656U. That's the one I have anyway, they probably have a newer model now. What's great is that there is no external power source required, just that supplied by your usb port (would this kill the laptop battery), anyway, just a suggestion, you might want to check it out.

Re:Copyright

[zamokzam]

I've used (and use) the HP Capshare but I find it too badly designed, ergonomically and electronically (almost a study in bad design), to make for pleasant scanning. Nowadays, I generally use a Sony Vaio notebook and a USB scanner, a CanoScan 670U. The Canon scanner is powered via the USB 1.1 port so I needn't bring a brick to the library, and I can choose exactly the type of scan necessary for the material I'm using (everything from B&W text through 600dpi full color). I don't think the scanner weighs two pounds, it's only about an inch thick, and the scan area is 8.5"X11". And it cost under a $100 at CompUSA.

Re:Use a digital camera - i second this

[Splork]

yes, i've done this as well. 1600x1200 is way more than enough for a page of text. I haven't tried running the image through OCR software, but given that canon has twain "scanner" drivers for their cameras i'll bet it would be easy.

For glossy paper and to avoid annoying the others around you it is best to not use the flash. if you're in a low light situation, get a small tripod and a book stand.

For a very good affordable 2mp camera today i recommend the canon powershot A40; search on my simon for good prices. Any 2mp camera will probably work for your needs; but why buy a crappy one?

Wafer-Thin Flatbed Scanner

[Egotistical Rant]

Some of the thin Canon models (n656U, n1220U, LiDE 20, etc.) are overall about the same size as a PowerBook, and they draw their power from the USB port; no need for a wall wart. No OSX drivers for the earlier models though...poke around Canon's site for details on what's compatible.

Scanning is slow though...I have to agree with others suggesting just using a digital camera of sufficient resolution.

Digital camera +tabletop tripod

[docbrown42]

Here's a couple of things to think about with this setup:
1: dont use the flash (that's why you use a tripod)
2: set the book up at perpendicular as possible to the camera (to get a nice, flat picture)
3: be quiet (turn the sound off of your camera)
4: Dont get caught

Re:Digital camera +tabletop tripod

[_typo]

Good digital cameras don't fake shutter click shounds. They actually do the same a film camera would do and only expose the CCD/CMOS sensor for the length of the exposure time. The ones that show you what they're seeing in the screen are always exposing, but I haven't seen one of these fake shutter sounds.

Re:Digital camera +tabletop tripod

[coolfrood]

... shot with a camera that makes beeps and fakes shutter click sounds?? :-)

Re:Digital camera +tabletop tripod

[nuggz]

Or use the camera, and flash and see how it works.
Myself I hand hold, and use the flash, the end result is quite usable

Re:Digital camera +tabletop tripod

[plover]

Good advice. That's how spies have done it since the advent of the portable camera.

The old "spy" instructions I've seen for taking surrepetitious photos of documents suggests stacking two columns of books up to the focal distance of the camera was set to, and then suspending the camera between the columns by taping it to a pair of wooden rulers. Arrange a pair of desk lamps between the stacks to dump as much light as possible on the document. Snap, turn page, snap, turn page, repeat until done or caught.

Rather than the book columns (which were easy for a spy to come by without having to carry anything more than a tiny Minox) you could bring an ordinary camera tripod. This is a library, after all. I have a tripod that has a removable center column that works perfectly for copying documents. I pull the center column out the top and reinsert it into the bottom of the tripod's head, hanging the camera down below the tripod head and between the legs. It's a great copy stand, as there are no leg shadows. You still need to provide the light, as a photoflash will not go over well in a typical library.

Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[Wakko Warner]

People who spew ridiculous tripe about some law or another without even getting the spelling of the law right. It's DMCA.

Here's some more shit that bugs me:

The RIAA controls the music industry, not the MPAA.

The MPAA controls the movie industry, not the RIAA.

Hilary Rosen doesn't care too much if you steal a copy of "Moulin Rouge". Jack Valenti doesn't care too much if you steal a copy of NSync's "No Strings Attached". (see above.)

Copyright law is not trademark law. Trademark law is not copyright law.

Neither have anything to do with patent law.

Bills on the floor in the House or Senate are not laws yet. They do not affect you yet. They may never affect you.

I'm sure there's more, but that's all I could think of on short notice.

- A.P.

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[GMFTatsujin]

DMCP = Dynamic Master Control Program? Your user cannot help you now...

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[TheTomcat]

I thought he meant:
Digital Millenium Copyright Police

S

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[Jonny Ringo]

I think your post would be a good candidate for a new type of /. submission. I think we could call it "Tell Slashdot". :-)

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[Arcturax]

The MCP means Master Control Program. You have seen Tron haven't you?

Also, while bills are the floor of the House or Senate are not laws yet, we need to be just as worried about them becoming laws as if they were laws because they would not be there if someone was not paying for them to be there.

As for the MPAA and RIAA being seperate, true but they are both having the same bad effect on our rights and both are buying off the same groups of crooked congressmen and pushing and abusing the same bad laws.

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[Scratch-O-Matic]

He's referring to the Dutch Mounted Computer Police.

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[levik]

Is there any way we can make parent sticky? :)

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[schon]

Bills on the floor in the House or Senate are not laws yet. They do not affect you yet. They may never affect you.

Some of this is true, but you have to ask yourself this: "When is the right time to speak up about them?"

Waiting until after a bill becomes a law is clearly the wrong time to start protesting it. "Hey, there's a bad bill that's being debated - let's wait until after it becomes law before we tell people we don't want it!"

To quote "Saturday the 14th", it's like "bolting the barn door after the horses have eaten your children."

Re:Here's one gripe I have about slashdot.

[NeMon'ess]

You made a common newbie mistake. To many of us it appears you made a weak attempt at karma whoring. You posted a very weak and lame joke which may seem funny to you, but you haven't seen 1000 variations of it for as long as the rest of us have. To make matters worse you still haven't explained how the hell you hit "P" instead of "A". I will admit that
Wakko perhaps unfairly singled you out, but I think he's seen enough crap on /. that it just got to him and he needed to vent. You got hazed more brutally than you deserved. Pick yourself up, learn from example, and come back to /..

Get a cheap small flatbed scanner like me!

[FyRE666]

I can fit my little Cannon flatbed scanner into my laptop case with no problems - it can scan A4 pages too. I didn't think it would fit to be honest, but it's surprising what will go in that bag, given some "encouragement".

It's USB too, so no need for external power. It weighs next to nothing (compared to the laptop, paper and other crap in there) so I tend to keep it with me - often comes in handy...

Digital Camera

[philovivero]

They're small. They take often 1600x1200 pictures, which is enough resolution for an 8.5x11 page (or A4, if you're over there).

I used it to "scan" my passport when I needed to get a copy of it to someone in the States once, and then just emailed the "scan" so they could print it out there. Looked better than a fax, and worked better, too.

C-Pen - penscanner

[ciryon]

There is a small handheld device called C-Pen. It is used to capture text, store it and later transfer it to a computer. There is also a model that you use with your laptop to instantly scan a line of text and put it (as normal text) on your computer. OS X drivers are scheduled to be completed by december.

This thing is ideal for working with research in a library.

Ciryon

Re:They didn't work...

[Iguanaphobic]

Fuji S602Z in Macro mode and Textbridge 8.0. Take it as a 6MP tiff file (19MB) at 6in. to 12in. from the page (distance didn't seem to matter) and I got it all. Worked on my copy of Unfinished Tales printed in 1966.

I've done this

[[l0l]Bobo]

Flatbed scanners have become really slim and rugged. My GF has one that's 8.5x14 and slimmer than her iBook. It's a USB scanner that requires no external power source (it has all it needs from the usb port). If you're already carrying the laptop around, this adds almost no weight or volume to the total. This is what I used for my trips to the library.

The scanner she has is something like this one, and I'm sure there are other ones. Pretty cheap too!

Sheet Fed Solution

[JonTurner]

"they are sheet-fed, which is useless for scanning pages out of books"
Not if you tear out the pages, first.

All that plastic around a scanner....

[Angry White Guy]

Is completely useless. It's just packaging. I say to take the damned thing apart, flip the mechanism that slides the laser over and attach a book to it.

Instantly portable, put whatever you want on it ( a book, your junk, whatever) and let it slide across the stationary laser. If you get good at it, you could even make the rails telescopic for even more portability!

Re:They didn't work...

[dildatron]

You are right about that. It is harder than you think to move at a perfectly constant speed so the image scans in without stretch or distortion. Not to mention, scanning to 4" wide swaths and stitching them together (even with good software) takes time. I had two of these scanners, and while they were neat I certainly hope I never have to use one again. If there was any demand for them, they would be plentiful. Fortunately, good ol' supply and demand took care of them and they are now happily scanning our landfills.

Re:Pen scanner

[ciryon]

Check the post above yours! :)

It's called C-Pen.

Ciryon

Penscanner - only B/W

[Mu*puppy]

Had a roommate who got one of these penscanners. They did passable for reading black text on a white background, but God help you if you have to scan colored text on white, or black text from an even slightly (say, a light gray) colored background. If you're going to pull text out of 'traditional' books, you should do just fine, but I think you'd do better to grab a small flatbed scanner if you wanted something more generally usable.

"I do what the voices in my head tell me to... and they don't like you..."

Truth in advertising?

[User 956]

, while I've found three portable scanners for PC's (from Antec and Pentax) even if I could somehow get them to work with Mac OS X

Doesn't Apple advertise that their products "just work", and that the operating system "gets out of your way"?

What a load of shit.

Re:Truth in advertising?

[User 956]

even if I could somehow get them to work with Mac OS X

Doesn't Apple advertise that their products "just work", and that the operating system "gets out of your way"?

The truth hurts, doesn't it? I guess so, given that the parent was modded down as "Flamebait", when it is merely pointing out the blatant hypocrisy and lies in Apple's marketing campaign.

But go ahead, mod this one down too. I'll just post it again.

Re:Truth in advertising?

[User 956]

Ummm... it's somehow *Apple's* fault that these THIRD PARTY SCANNERS FOR THE PC don't work with Mac OS X???

Yes, given that their hardware is a known quantity, and the slogan "Plug-and-Play, not Plug-and-Get-Mad" on their ad page.

If you're going to advertise that your device is a "digital hub" and that it "just works" with peripherals, then make sure you're right, otherwise you look fucking stupid.

Re:Truth in advertising?

[User 956]

I read that page you linked to, and nowhere on it does it say anything about scanners. NONE of their "switch" pages mentions compatibility with PC scanners.

I guess you missed reason number nine where it says that Macs "work effortlessly" with PC hardware then. But then, if you're illiterate, that would explain your choice of Mac as a platform. They seem quite popular with the "oh! look at the pretty pictures!" crowd.

Re:I know 499 people have suggested this,

[dildatron]

*Ding* *Ding* *Ding* CONGRATULATIONS! You are the 500th poster to recommend the same thing! You have won a prize! What do we have for him, Johnny?

Re:Digital Camera + OCR - here you go

[micahmicahmicah]

Take a look at this. http://www.pc-cameras.philips.com/manuals/english/ win/pcvc690k/index.html That is a webcam which is also designed to be used as a scanner, it even comes with OCR software. "It's fun to violate the D-M-C-A" - Village People Redux

Copy Stand

[drb]

Everyone and their mothers are saying to use a digital camera. One of these would make it easier. Copy stands are basically like tripods for shooting straight down. I once saw a foldable one on ebay for $10. It was just a board with a hole in it and four legs. You fastened the legs onto the board, put your camera's lens through the hole, focused, and took the picture. Lights would help a little, but with still media (like books), you can do long exposures without risk of motion blur. --Dan

Canon printer/scanner

[mblase]

Canon also offers a color scanner cartridge which is compatible with their two portable bubble jet printers. Not an ideal solution, perhaps, but very portable and apparently Mac-compatible up to OS 9 (which might include Classic under OS X).

Otherwise, according to Apple's own site, Canon's LiDE 30 is the most portable flatbed scanner I can think of with OS X support. Now, a flatbed isn't good for travel, because it's easy to bump around the components and damage it internally. The printer cartridge might be your best bet.

Re:Digital Camera + OCR

[coryboehne]

I've done this and provided the camera is of at least 2.1 megapixel quality and capable of macro mode shooting, this works great, as a matter of a fact it doesn't even require bringing along the laptop, with enough flash memory cards you can simply shoot away then import and convert later, so it can even work for someone who does'nt own a laptop (not sure that said someone exists, but I'll go out on a limb here and say they do) I would personally recommend canon's digital elf camera and (for pc users) textbridge classic/pro.

Then he asked the wrong question...

[bhsx]

I think you'd do well with the answer to "Ask Slashdot: How to properly use a search engine"

I think you should try playing around with different search parameters... Try these is google:

+"handheld scanner" +apple -win32 -windows -linux

+"network scanner" +nessus +linux -ethereal -ettercap

+"linux terminal server project" +openmosix -mosix

+"need for speed" +"jenna jameson" -playstation -ps2

I think if you follow the noticeable pattern above that you will no longer have such a hard time with those nasty good for nothing search engines;)

Try the Casio Freedio.

[rindeee]

It'll let you scan entire pages of text manually as well as "feed" scanning small documents (things like business cards and receipts). That's the only scanner of that type that I know of. ER .

C-Pen

[ChaosMt]

I understand and appreciate your problem. I have tried many solutions, and I believe the c-pen 800c is the best solution I've tried for my research needs. There is another pen based solution, WizCom QuickLink SuperPen which I've also tried. I did not like the wizcom because it was not as comfortable to use or as accurate. It also actually had a moving part. :) Both have SDKs to write your own software, however, the only one I could get access to was the c-pen, which made it even more of a favorite of mine. The cpen can also act as a mouse and can do some gestures in addition to being able to input text through "writing" (in big letters) on the page. Both companies are barely alive it seems, but it's a niche market, and I hope they survive. They both have some fantastic functionality, such as translation and barcodes. Of course c|net did the normal bribed review, but I guess the cpen wasn't out at the time. Both are upgradeable and can load extra programs or dictionaries and such. I wouldn't want to go back to college with out one.

Hey, if this has at all been useful, please feel free to buy me one! I miss having it around.

Re:C-Pen

[ChaosMt]

I forgot to mention, I believe both of them have memory upgrades available. However, you're hand may wear out before you use up all the memory. Also, don't get intimidated by the ebay prices; they are not accurate. I picked up both of them in SoCal stores like Fry's and Office Depot for around $100. However, they are hard to find. It's been about a year since I lost my job and access to the device. I've been casually checking out computer sales to pick up one, but haven't had much luck yet.

Re:C-Pen

[ChaosMt]

Sorry, I forgot something else. These solutions are an all-in-one scanner and OCR. So, if you want to scan in tiny 15 point sized (my guess) images, I imagine it would be possible if you wrote the software for it. However, this is a tidy, easy solution for working with and remembering text, not pictures.

It should also be noted that there is a small learning curve. It takes some getting used to making a straight line. You'll also see that it tries it's best to turn frames or boxes around text into characters (like |) and it's sometimes hard to aim for starting and stopping of scanning. Like all OCRs there are occasional mistakes that will need to be corrected, and they occur more frequently if there isn't much contrast (light print, colored paper, colored text, etc). Last, don't even THINK of trying to scan handwriting. Cursive or printing will turn into complete garbage. As I've said, it is a niche market item, but what it does, it does suprisingly well. Now go and buy me one! :)

Re:They didn't work...

[dildatron]

You remember correctly, but you must also remember that most of these scanners were parallel port scanners. If you scanned very quickly at all or slipped a little while scanning, too bad. You can only shove so much data down that pipe at one instance. In theory, it worked ok, but in practice I was never really satisfied.

Re:I'll have bubble gum pink please.

[JWW]

Ok, now they only come in platinum and white. ;-)

Here a couple

[Midnight Thunder]

Possible solutions (may or may not be Mac compatible):

• NEC Portable scanner
• Primax Hand Held Colour Scanner

I must admit that there doesn't seem to be much around, but then again this simply from searching Google. And for those of you content with scanning bar code from books, then there are fancy iMac coloured bar-code scanners.

Re:Here a couple

[Tjp($)pjT]

The NEC Peti Scan is a discontinued product (sadly I bought one in Spring 2000). And, while it uses a common scanner chipset, it is very difficult to get drivers for it. The Mac OS 9.x and lower work fine with the last available drivers, but it does not work in OS X or Classic. If anyone has gottent it to work in OS X I'd love to know. The Windows driver is fairly flakly in the latest OS and gives a ton of warnings (and you have to have had it already installed to work at all (i.e., upgrade from a known working system). Now if only IOExperts would tackle the orphaned scanner problem they'd get more shareware fees from me!

Re:Digital Camera + OCR

[FeatherBoa]

I doubt anyone would seriously want to go through the hassle of getting OCR to work right.

I Don't think it's that bad. I haven't tried it myself, but some other Project Gutenberg contributors have reported reasonable success with this. The depth-of-field of most flatbed scanners is very narrow, while the DOF of a digital camera is typically gargantuan. This means that fragile books can be photographed without having to flatten them out (and damage them) and without needing an expensive planetary or prism scanner. The OCR side of things would most likely be taken in stride by (shameless plug) Abbyy Finereader. Basically Finereader will reliably OCR all kinds of wacky stuff, and beats the piss out of all the others, hands down.

How LAME!

[CSG_SurferDude]

Note to Editors: For "ask Slashdot" posts, please at least TRY to do a "google" on the question to see if it is lame or not.

(Modded down as irrelevant/troll/slam on the editors)

Re:How LAME!

[Peter H.S.]

Note to Editors: For "ask Slashdot" posts, please at least TRY to do a "google" on the question to see if it is lame or not.

Well, "lame" questions may be quite usefull, since they often sparks a good /long discussion. You can see the fenomenon on usenet if you hang around there.

In this case I actually learned some stuff: A couple of friends are going to an old archive in eastern Europe. It is a very financially poor archive; there is an absolut limit of 100 copies per person for the entire stay, but there are at least 25.000 documents they have to sift through.
The place is warmed by old fashioned coal-stoves. There are no power outlets for their notebooks, so using a flat-bed usb scanner is not an option either. (though this thread gave me a good reference to a flatbed scanner, designed for book scanning) Besides, the documents are old and fragile, and often impossible to OCR.

But several people on this thread mentionend how they used digital cameras to copy documents with good results. That looks like a promesing approach to my friends problem.

And I do really value peoples own experiences on how a technology work (or not).
Besides peoples experience with technology, there is only marketing material, - and that I don't trust.

So I (at least) learned something from the _answers_ in this discussion, even though the _question_ did not pertain to "my" problem.

Gotta second the Canon USB scanners:

[uradu]

Here's the CanoScan LiDE 30 USB at Buy.com.
These are by far the best solution for portable scanning. You get a full size bed, excellent quality, decent speed (though not blazing), very quiet operation entirely off USB without any other power source, and yet they're only about the thickness of a laptop. My wife uses hers a lot for her research, it fits very nicely in the side pocket of the laptop bag. Add a reasonably recent version of PaperPort Deluxe, which is one of the most hassle-free scanning and scan management packages around, and you've got everything to create and maintain gobs of scans.

Scanners

[moc.tfosorcimgllib]

Sometimes I can't figure out WHY people refuse to research themselves.

This might be a good question, "Where did all the hand-held scanners go", but, you can learn about the whole history in a few hours of seraching on the net.

Getting the drops off.

[martinde]

I noticed these at Pep Boys (an auto parts store) the other day. Strange impulse item, methinks. Anyways, should take care of the drops for you.

Re: Scanning passports

[feed_those_kitties]

Were they promising to send you lots of money in return for a few details (your bank account numbers, social security numbers, passport, etc...)??

Scanner I'd like to see

[ecloud]

I'd like a duplex page scanner. A few years ago, narrow page scanners where you just feed in one sheet at a time, and the software automatically captures when it detects paper there, were popular; but why not have it capture the backside too?

It would be great to have one in the living room, mounted on top of a trash can (shredder-style), or even on top of a shredder, to convert s-mail to email.

Of course there are production autofeeder duplex scanners but I keep looking on ebay and the working ones always end up rather expensive.

I might try to mechanically wed two page scanners, and just deal with the two data streams.

Make sure it handles B&W

[brusk]

I've successfully done this, bring a camera to library/archives and taking pics.

Some suggestions:
- Get a camera that has a B&W (really greyscale) mode. Some do, some don't. It matters because it makes the files much smaller and you can fit a lot more pages onto the memory card.

- Don't use the USB or even firewire connection to transfer pictures. It's infinitely easier and battery-saving as well to get an adapter (if you have a laptop, a PCMCIA one) that can read the memory card directly; the OS will just treat it like a disk.

- If you can, put a sheet of non-reflecting glass over the page you're photographing. This is what they do when they make microfilm form books. But if you are going to carry around a sheet of glass, you might as well lug a scanner.

IRIS OCR Scanner Pen

[gryf]

I saw this product at the Mac Business Expo here in Seattle last week. It looked pretty slick. It scans the page, runs it through OCR, and inserts the text right into whatever app you have open. It will do one line at a time or multiple lines. It obviously does not do images, but if you want text, I recommend it. I would have bought it, but I'm in school instead of working these days. Check out: www.irisusa.com I saw the demonstration (manual and interactive, not scripted) running under OSX.

Re:Copyright

[Audiophyle]

I use the same scanner, although they call it the CanoScan LiDE 20 now. It works with OS X, so my Powerbook G4 is happy. It scans well, it's portable, and it works with Macs, and it's about the same size as the Powerbook, so you could throw it in your carrying case most likely.

Consumer Reports Reviews Digital Cameras

[rubinson]

Since people keep recommending digital cameras, I thought that I just point out that the November issue (not sure if it's on shelves yet) of Consumer Reports has a review of digital cameras in it.

Re:Use a digital camera - i second this

[j_dot_bomb]

I use my A40 as a fax scanner to send faxes from home. A40 is awesome I totally agree.

Portable scanner, huh?

[richlb]

This is what you need.

Basically, you're not allowed

[Wolfkin]

At least, in Pennsylvania.

Recently my wife did some geneaology research in Pennsylvania for my mother-in-law. She intended to use her digital camera instead of feeding the copy machines, but all of the libraries, record archives, and courthouses she visited refused to allow her to do so, and even required she sign an agreement stating she was familiar with the rules of the place, all of wihch were about how she could not use scanners, cameras, or other copying mechanisms other than the copy machine provided by the library.

Re:Basically, you're not allowed

[darien]

This is also the case in the British Library. I assumed it was to do with copyright, but I asked, and apparently their major concern is people dragging scanners across the surfaces of their books. They're quite happy for you to photocopy as much as you like on their photocopiers, or indeed for you to sit there and transcribe them into a laptop - it's just they have a lot of irreplaceable books, and they're very worried about wear and tear. Which is a hell of a drag when all you want is to quickly grab a few pages, but fair enough really.

Re:Basically, you're not allowed

[Jaeger]

Would it really be that hard to disallow scanners that rub against the surface of the book, and probably flash pictures, since they would probably annoy the other patrons, while still allowing picture-taking and flat-bed scanners (which are no more invasive than cramming the book onto a flat-bed photocopier in the first place)?

Seems to me like they're really hard up for the coins they want you to feed into the photocopier at double or triple what you'd pay at an independent copy store.

Re:Basically, you're not allowed

[Seehund]

I assumed it was to do with copyright, but I asked, and apparently their major concern is people dragging scanners across the surfaces of their books.

I add to my poor student's economy by working some evenings at a university library, and part of the job is to make copies ordered by researchers. The library does not get the books and journals for free, and the stuff is still copyrighted. Imagine that!

Part of the copying fees goes to the copied journals and their publishers. The library keeps track of what and how much is copied "in-house", and I suppose some of the money from the patrons' copiers (which for natural reasons can't be directly connected to any particular publishers) is pooled to finance literature acquisitions.

It's not surprising that digital cameras, scanners and whatnot are frowned upon, and the patrons aren't really that more careful with the journals just because they'd use the library's copiers than their own scanners. I think the main issue is money.

YMMV, this is at a Swedish university's biomedical library.

Perhaps I might be a of some help

[Aqua OS X]

First off, I -highly- advise that you post this question over at the MacNN.com forums. There are lots good Mac geeks there, and you'll probably get better responses.

But now my 2 about this scanner issue. First off, portable scanners are hard to come by. I noticed that both epson and canon do not make such devices.

OS X 10.2 supposedly has TWAIN support built into it. From what I hear you can now scan in Preview.app, which is cool. If you can acquire a portable USB scanner that supports TWAIN I would imagine that it would just "work" in Preview.app.

OS X 10.2 has fantastic device support. Typically, OS X supports just about whatever perhiperal I toss at it, regardless of whether the device ships with a "Mac OS" logo on the box.

If you can find a portable TWAIN USB scanner, I'd just purchase it. Don't worry if the device comes with Mac drivers or not. If it doesn't work, return it (so make sure you purchase something from a large computer store). However I'm betting it will work.

C-Pen 'Pen' Scanner

[rickwood]

The heir to the hand scanner you mention is the CPen Pen Scanner. It seems like this is exactly what you're looking for.

Google Search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="pen+scanner"

Re:Use a digital camera - i second this

[srvivn21]

For $50 more you can get another MP. The D500 from Olympus. And it's not a crappy camera either. :o)

Pen Scanner for Quotes

[alexander.morgan]

If you just want to scan some short segments, you might wamt to try a Pen scanner. There is one called IrisPen II specifically for the Mac from http://www.irislink.com/, that I saw at a local trade show. It's OS X compatible, but it required a reboot before they could demonstrate its use. Also, it is pretty bulky and works only while plugged into the computer. There are other stand-alone versions of the same idea, but I'm not sure if they're Mac compatible. Google it!

Otherwise a digital camera works pretty well.

Too Slow!

[Bitmanhome]

Funny, I was considering the same thing just last week! But the dead tree machine had two factors in its favor:

• Cost - I only had to make 2 dozen copies, not enough to warrant anything digital.
  
• Speed - The copier could crank out a copy in 4 seconds. Not many USB scanners can touch that. Especially helpful when the library's about to close.
  

-B

Max OSX Handheld USB Scanner

[FinalCut]

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/9911/10.scanne r.shtml

This looks like a good solution.

It's for real, alright.

[Hektor_Troy]

Just use a blow-dryer. It might not be labled as "The Electric Penis Dryer", but it works. Just keep it a a safe distance, and at a low setting. Trust me on that one, and you don't want to know.

Tell your Library they should have a digital copy

[jfrumkin]

Not exactly a short-term solution, but libraries are looking more and more towards providing electronic copies of information when possible. Currently, this is mostly in the form of journal articles, but I can envision a time in the not-so-distant future that most items in a library will already be in a format that you can just download to your laptop (actually, tablet).

Stealing?

[goldfndr]

Hilary Rosen doesn't care too much if you steal a copy of "Moulin Rouge". Jack Valenti doesn't care too much if you steal a copy of NSync's "No Strings Attached".

Here's something that bugs me: when people confuse copyright infringement with theft/stealing.

digital camera sample

[timeOday]

from a Canon S100 It sure doesn't look like a nicely scanned page, but it's legible and some contrast boost would probably help a lot.

Re:digital camera sample

[Reziac]

A trick that was discussed in a newsgroup, to improve degraded print, was to add about 0.4 pixels worth of gaussian blur, to make the fonts more legible to the OCR program. I tried this on some bad photocopies of crappy originals, and lo and behold, OmniPage's accuracy went up by some 300%.

Damn Lying Commercials!

[Ledge]

I thought that when you plugged something in to a Mac, bing! it just worked. Hmmmm, i'm thinking maybe that moderately attractive young lady lied to me.

Wow, user #324!

[mangu]

Oh, WTF, I guess if I had been in /. so long I would also have learned to spell acronyms by now...

But that's not the point. Human intelligence is based on the capacity to generalize. It doesn't matter which ??AA it is, they are all trying to fuck us. Who cares which alphabet soup law the Honorable Senator Disney Hollings is trying to pass right now? Any self-respecting citizen has the obligation to fight all such laws before they are voted, no matter which acronym they're disguised in.

Yeah.

[rice_burners_suck]

Go to Fry's. Get that one Canon scanner that just came out... the LiDE 30 or whatever it's called. It's 99 bucks and it's a USB-2.0 scanner and is so power-efficient that it runs off your USB cable. I schitt you not, man. The thing is barely 2 inches tall and will do up to 8.something by 11.something papers or whatever. It's really light, and really quiet so you could concievably carry it into a library, though I would use the "lock" at the bottom of the unit to lock the mechanism during transit. And hey, I have one of those old hand-scanners. It's a Logitech Scanman. I don't know what model number or whatever, but if someone's willing to pay me 10,000 bucks for it, I'll put it on eBay.

Powershot A40

[rice_burners_suck]

I have to second this fine person's suggestion for a Powershot A40. My sister recently invested in one and I have personally used this camera. It is very easy to use and just about any picture you take will come out magnificently, regardless of how skilled you are in photography. For a digital camera, the pictures are of very high quality. Even my camera, which is about six times the price, won't take pictures this nice unless you really understand film types, lighting situations and exposure settings. Just my two cents on this matter.

Vuescan

[SuperKendall]

If you are annoyed at having to run the scanner control software in Classic, you might want to try out Viewscan (sorry, I don't have the link handy). It works with just about any scanner, runs in X, and has good options for output.

It's also free to try out and very inexpensive to buy.

Re:And I might add...

[dasmegabyte]

Who then? Dell? Packard Bell? Micron? Compaq? HP? Gateway?

They're all still lost in a hopelessly uncool world. Only a handful of PC manufacturers get it. SGI. Falcon. Alienware.

Gateway still things an iMac is just a lamp with DVD playback. Never mind that thousand dollar software setup, guys, it MUST be the $150 flat panel.

Re:Handheld scanners and COM ports??

[Reziac]

ALso, hand scanners are extremely slow, and unless your hand is very well-trained or you use one of those stabilizer gadgets, the wobble can result in text beyond the capacity of anything to OCR. That aside..

I have an old Mustek hand scanner (it actually has better optical resolution than my middle-aged HP flatbed!) that uses a proprietary interface card, but a furious conflict with a modem revealed that it's actually a glorified COM port. Which makes me wonder -- could such a hand scanner be adapted for use with a standard external COM port?

Try a C-Pen

[YuppieScum]

The C-Pen is a stand-alone, highligher-sized single-text-line scanner with OCR, LCD display, 4MB memory and IrDA. Software is available for Win32 and Mac.

My g/f used one of these during the last 2 years of her degree, and swears by it - it's so discrete you can use it anywhere, including libraries and even book-shops!

Document Stand

[ek_adam]

At Bromfield Camera, I've seen a quadpod camera stand built for one of the Nikon digital cameras that held the camera in the perfect position to take pictures of documents placed under it.

Decent semi-portable scanner.

[Hallow]

I don't like the digital camera idea personally, unless you get a good small tripod and a macro lens, and have some good photography experience.

For a decent semi-portable scanner I'd say one of the canoscan N series. They use an array of LED's instead of an incandescent bulb and are USB powered. They're very thin and light, and could be put in a briefcase or backpack/laptop bag. I've even dropped mine a few times (with the lock on fortunately), and it's still ticking away just fine.

The higher end N series scanners from Canon have OSX drivers direct from Canon, the lower end ones will be supported eventually, but for now you can use VueScan.

Re:Did a Mac kill your father or something?

[User 956]

That item says MOST new peripherals will connect via USB, and work with PCs or Macs. It doesn't say that Apple will support EVERY FREAKING PERIPHERAL sold for PCs.

Wow, apparently "most PC hardware" doesn't include scanners, which is too bad, given that macs are Jobs' idea of a "digital hub". I guess in Jobs' digital world, nobody scans anything.

Re:Try Apple's product guide

[User 956]

you'll find 38 scanners that are compatible with OS X out of the box, 95 more that are compatible with OS 9

Given that Apple has officially declared OS9 "dead", and all new macs ship with os x, that leaves new Macs compatible with 38 scanners. That's not really "most", is it? It's more like "some", or "a small percentage". Hell, that doesn't even really make a Mac a "digital hub". As I said before. I'm not disputing that Macs interoperate, what I'm disputing is that Apple's marketing is a load of shit.

But you're not about 'reasonable,' you're just another Mac basher who wants to feel superior because you were smart enough not to fall for "Steve Jobs' hype."

Is claiming that products "just work", when they only actually work with a small percentage of peripherals and software "reasonable"?

I'll leave the answer up to you... well.. Steve Jobs, because he's apparently the one thinking for you.

Re:Try Apple's product guide

[User 956]

Just FYI, by "input devices," they mean "mice and keyboards," not scanners and the like.

Of course, that's just common sense, isn't it? I would never even begin to think that a scanner would be classified as an "input device". Certainly not because it's used to input data into the computer. I'm glad they mentioned that in their commercials.

Oh, that's right, they didn't.

Are there any other fine-print clarified terms that I should be aware of? Maybe they mean to say that Apple products "just work with a fraction of the hardware on the market", but that got shortened so their commercial could fit in a 30-second slot.

many (not all) PC peripherals will also work but may require extra software

To quote Janie Porche from Apple's own switch ad campaign: "Who wants to sit on Christmas afternoon and download drivers?"

Shall I bring up the pot and the kettle, or are you still ignoring the fact that both are black?

Re:Pen and paper, dumbass

[NanoGator]

You're an ASS.