Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The DIY Book Scanner

Posted by Soulskill on from the lightening-the-load dept.

azoblue writes "Daniel Reetz did not want to lug around heavy textbooks, so he built a book scanner to create digital copies. '... over three days, and for about $300, he lashed together two lights, two Canon Powershot A590 cameras, a few pieces of acrylic and some chunks of wood to create a book scanner that's fast enough to scan a 400-page book in about 20 minutes (PDF). To use it, he simply loads in a book and presses a button, then turns the page and presses the button again. Each press of the button captures two pages, and when he's done, software on Reetz's computer converts the book into a PDF file. The Reetz DIY book scanner isn't automated — you still need to stand by it to turn the pages. But it's fast and inexpensive.'"

7 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. A bargain by thethibs · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except for the lack of an automatic page-turner, Daniel's device is the same as one you can buy commercially for about $20,000 (http://www.treventus.com/bookscanner_pageturner.html).

    He was wise to decide on manual page-turning.

    --
    I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
  2. repost by AnonGCB · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://bkrpr.org/doku.php

    Same thing, much cheaper (I built mine for ~150 USD.)

    --
    http://CryoLANparty.com/ A lan I'm staff on!
    1. Re:repost by idji · · Score: 5, Informative

      yeah, but you have to press 2 buttons and then lift your two cameras with your 4 sided PMMA/perspex/plexiglass box every time - he has a hinged L-shaped piece of perspex and one button - a more elegant solution - half the button presses, the cameras don't move and less weight.

  3. Re:Are there scanners that accept a stack of sheet by hansonc · · Score: 5, Informative

    You must not have ever gone to college. A textbook for $15? Get real.

  4. Re:Cameras usually stink for this.... by smallfries · · Score: 4, Informative

    You haven't actually tried this have you? I've had various flatbed A4 scanners over the years, all at much higher resolution than a camera, and hence all got down-sampled afterwards for my display that is only 1.5MP anyway. Then I switched to using a phone camera with only a 2MP CCD, but a really good lens and decent macro mode (Sony-Ericcson Cybershot for those that are interested). As long as the focus was good it produced perfectly readable shots, and so it became my portable scanner. These days I mostly shot stuff at home so I have a 12MP DSLR to hand. It's huge overkill, and I massively down-sample stuff afterwards, but entirely readable. So your basic claim that this can't be done with a camera based on the resolution compared to a scanner is a complete load of bollocks. The focus of the lens tends to be the important issue.

    --
    Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  5. Re:Heh by atarkri · · Score: 4, Informative

    The school is NDSU. Yes we (he) looked. No our library does not have one.

    He has details of the reasons on his blog danreetz.com/blog

  6. Re:I've by The+-e**(i*pi) · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.geocities.jp/takascience/lego/fabs_en.html

    turning the pages and scanning is childs play