Scanning question (Is destruction of old tech docs a moral crime?)

[ED SHARPE]

IN SCANNING PHOTOS FOR SMECC  IF  LARGE, I SCAN AT 300,  IF  SMALL AND   IN CASE  WE  WANT TO MAKE LARGER,   SOMETIMES 600. ED# 
ps 1200 SEENS  TO  GO  NO WHERE EXCEPT  SOMETIME  AD  WEIRDNESS

In a message dated 7/21/2019 1:58:45 PM US Mountain Standard Time, cctalk at classiccmp.org writes:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 1:13 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, Jason T via cctalk wrote:
> > I don't know about the ScanSnap specifically, but I suspect that
> > 1200dpi mode may be interpolated, not true optical 1200.  In either
> > case, I've rarely seen any great benefit to using >600, at least on
> > any scanner I've used (my main workhorse now being a Fujitsu
> > fi-5750C).
>
> It's like the difference between laser printing and real typesetting.
> 'course many people can't see the difference.
> Below 2400dpi, the characters in the text are not as smooth.
> Even 300DPI scans of 300DPI are unlikely to be lined up, to keep from
> getting degradation.
>

Yea, but there's an ROI issue, at least for me... I see no added value
about 600dpi for the intended use (people having the manuals to
troubleshoot/learn the old systems). 300->600 is a bit dubious as well, but
in that case the delta in terms of time to do and storage is so small that
I think the enhance resolution is worth it...

Then again, I have 20 years of bills and such I've scanned in at between
200dpi and 400dpi and for that purpose, those resolutions are fine. I may
kick it up to 600dpi + search indexing since I see how I can easily add
that and scansnap's OCR isn't terrible (and can actually do the old scans
years after the fact, which is nice for the huge unsorted files I end up
with when I don't have the time to sort by vendor)...

Warner

Warner