Nobody cares when Google did this or when archive.org does this, because they’re sharing the results with the world. (Idiotic shortsighted lawsuits from the authors guild notwithstanding)
Google (and/or the libraries that collaborate with Google Books) and Archive.org usually scan non-destructively. Some of Google’s book scans still show the fingers holding the corners of the pages, some of them were taken mistakenly mid-flip, etc. So they clearly used whole, normally bound books.
Having done a lot of scanning in the past, no matter how gentle you are, the book will be damaged; at least a little bit. Even if you do it manually, by hand, really slowly.
It’s the unfortunate reality, because books are not designed to be held open and pressed flat onto an unyielding surface. If you don’t press flat, you’ll get curved pages and bad quality (dark) images, which is sometimes ok and fixable by software, but often not. You can get really fancy expensive machines, but they still don’t fully solve the problem.
I did scanlation editing stuff for a while, and half my job was making the raw page scans look presentable, because the scanners didn’t want to destroy their manga (understandable).
This matches my experience. My college archive digitizes a few yearbooks a year (for whatever classes are having as big reunion) and it’s a pain. For modern yearbooks (70s and later) we have a dozen or more copies, so we take one apart and feed it through the feed scanner, which works well. We then store the loose pages in a folder, in case we need to rescan anything.
Older yearbooks (where we don’t have so many copies) we use the flatbed scanner and the pages come out warped, so we hand fix each page in Photoshop.
Yepp… memories of using the light level curve tool and white point and black point and the perspective tool. Then going in with the white brush and deleting any specks of dust that remained, and comparing to the original to make sure no lines got deleted
Digitized for private consumption.
Nobody cares when Google did this or when archive.org does this, because they’re sharing the results with the world. (Idiotic shortsighted lawsuits from the authors guild notwithstanding)
Google (and/or the libraries that collaborate with Google Books) and Archive.org usually scan non-destructively. Some of Google’s book scans still show the fingers holding the corners of the pages, some of them were taken mistakenly mid-flip, etc. So they clearly used whole, normally bound books.
in this case they often are actually destroying them. they take them apart, beause it’s easier to scan than to use a proper book scanner
Yeah that’s true of Google as well I believe. I think Archive is more careful, but I’m sure some books get damaged in the process there as well.
Having done a lot of scanning in the past, no matter how gentle you are, the book will be damaged; at least a little bit. Even if you do it manually, by hand, really slowly.
It’s the unfortunate reality, because books are not designed to be held open and pressed flat onto an unyielding surface. If you don’t press flat, you’ll get curved pages and bad quality (dark) images, which is sometimes ok and fixable by software, but often not. You can get really fancy expensive machines, but they still don’t fully solve the problem.
I did scanlation editing stuff for a while, and half my job was making the raw page scans look presentable, because the scanners didn’t want to destroy their manga (understandable).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_scanning#Methods
This matches my experience. My college archive digitizes a few yearbooks a year (for whatever classes are having as big reunion) and it’s a pain. For modern yearbooks (70s and later) we have a dozen or more copies, so we take one apart and feed it through the feed scanner, which works well. We then store the loose pages in a folder, in case we need to rescan anything.
Older yearbooks (where we don’t have so many copies) we use the flatbed scanner and the pages come out warped, so we hand fix each page in Photoshop.
Yepp… memories of using the light level curve tool and white point and black point and the perspective tool. Then going in with the white brush and deleting any specks of dust that remained, and comparing to the original to make sure no lines got deleted