4 ms·

I'm curious as to why they need to destroy the books? Remember Google's open book scanner? http://linearbookscanner.org/ http://linearbookscanner.org/ https:/

I'm curious as to why they need to destroy the books? Remember Google's open book scanner? http://linearbookscanner.org/ http://linearbookscanner.org/ https://code.google.com/p/linear-book-scanner/ https://code.google.com/p/linear-book-scanner/

cokernel 11y ago
Presumably they found it more important to preserve the pages than to preserve the volume binding. The FAQ for the linear book scanner indicates that Prototype 1 mangles pages in some way (tears or folds) in about 45% of books it scans. Moreover, it used to be common to create bound volumes by binding multiple issues of a serial together. (In some cases the bindery would crop pages to fit!) The binding is often so tight that the volume cannot open flat enough for a full scan. Separating the pages from the spine allows for the entire page to be imaged without distortion. Edit: Incorporated correction. I had accidentally stated the claim more strongly than the FAQ supported; however, my point does not depend on the claim being as strong as the form in which I had stated it.
- markbao 11y ago
  Correction: it mangles one or two pages in 45% of books it scans. Prototype 1 could scan the majority of books without damage, but may tear one or two pages in some books. Out of 50 books tested, 45% had one or two of their pages either torn or folded. This is a very early prototype and there are many areas for improvement in the design. http://linearbookscanner.org/faq/ http://linearbookscanner.org/faq/
  - cokernel 11y ago
    Incidentally, 45% of 50 is not an integer. This makes me wonder how many books were actually tested. Or were they just rounding up from 44%?
wahsd 11y ago
Probably because the books are far less important than the information. That being said, they are probably throwing away an opportunity to sell the books as novelty or decorative items. But who knows, maybe the cost-benefit is just not worth it.
JackC 11y ago
It sounds like that machine gets one page every 11 seconds -- maybe 360 per hour? We're getting more like 8,000 per hour. The rule of thumb apparently is, best case, books you can't cut the binding off cost 5-8x as much to scan as books you can.

cokernel 11y ago

Presumably they found it more important to preserve the pages than to preserve the volume binding. The FAQ for the linear book scanner indicates that Prototype 1 mangles pages in some way (tears or folds) in about 45% of books it scans. Moreover, it used to be common to create bound volumes by binding multiple issues of a serial together. (In some cases the bindery would crop pages to fit!) The binding is often so tight that the volume cannot open flat enough for a full scan. Separating the pages from the spine allows for the entire page to be imaged without distortion. Edit: Incorporated correction. I had accidentally stated the claim more strongly than the FAQ supported; however, my point does not depend on the claim being as strong as the form in which I had stated it.

markbao 11y ago
Correction: it mangles one or two pages in 45% of books it scans. Prototype 1 could scan the majority of books without damage, but may tear one or two pages in some books. Out of 50 books tested, 45% had one or two of their pages either torn or folded. This is a very early prototype and there are many areas for improvement in the design. http://linearbookscanner.org/faq/ http://linearbookscanner.org/faq/
- cokernel 11y ago
  Incidentally, 45% of 50 is not an integer. This makes me wonder how many books were actually tested. Or were they just rounding up from 44%?

wahsd 11y ago

Probably because the books are far less important than the information. That being said, they are probably throwing away an opportunity to sell the books as novelty or decorative items. But who knows, maybe the cost-benefit is just not worth it.

JackC 11y ago

It sounds like that machine gets one page every 11 seconds -- maybe 360 per hour? We're getting more like 8,000 per hour. The rule of thumb apparently is, best case, books you can't cut the binding off cost 5-8x as much to scan as books you can.