High DPI minimaly invasive Scanning Solution?

I have some art books i would like to scan and blow up to poster size but i don't want to crease spines and generally want to disturb the books as little as possible. What is Jow Forums's solution?

Attached: Wand Scanner.jpg (800x800, 86K)

realistically you'd want an archival/book scanner. We have one at work that cost the better part of $15,000.

Not sure what options would be best for small scale operation, but there wont be anything fantastic. Anything in normal consumer price range will either not provide a great quality scan, or be somewhat damaging to the book.

Is that something that a college would have?

I know even some institutes that have made their digitizing work with camera and good setup. Idea is to make black matt box with as even as possible lightning and using sturdy tripod and high resolution camera. But that won't be cheap either if you don't have anything ready. That's also quite fast.

A larger university would most likely have one yes, especially if they have an older library that hasn't been digitized or is in the process of being digitized.

The best solution for this is a camera with a good lens. It's pricey if you don't already have it, but let's be honest: It's 2018 and everyone should have a good camera. So if you need to buy one, now you have an excuse.

You can use a scanner like the one you posted, but expect mediocre results.

What do i look for in a camera to get a high enough resolution to comfortably blow up to poster or even banner size?

>It's 2018 and everyone should have a good camera.
You've got it wrong.

It's 2018, everybody already has a halfway decent camera in their pocket and unless you make $$$ with a real camera professionally, you have no reason to buy anything dedicated to pictures. The smartphone is good enough for 99% of people.

Realistically a DSLR with a decent lens. So $1000 would probably be a decent starting point.

I dunno. The sharpness of the book's images is probably limiting. You can do the math by yourself. (I don't know about printing really)

>What do i look for in a camera to get a high enough resolution to comfortably blow up to poster or even banner size?

That's material really, but what I would do is get a entry level APS-C DSLR with a decent macro lens with a low minimum focusing distance. Then I'd take multiple overlapping photos as close range and stitch them together in Photoshop to make a really high resolution composite. The total cost with kind of setup shouldn't be that high at all, and the result will beat any mobile scanner and even single shot book scanning rigs.

You'll have to jury rig a frame to hold the camera steady as well as use a lamp for lighting and you'll need to be able to shoot manually and know how to use Photoshop. But I assume you know how to do this already or are not a brainlet so you can Youtube tutorial the stuff you need to learn.

And aren't all the mid tier cameras around 20 megapickels nowadays? So you might want to read some reviews to find some sharp prime lens. Btw, don't colleges etc. have some semi-pro stuff to borrow if that's some study thing?

A $150 Acer laptop with Windows 10 Home is good enough for 99% of people. What is your point?

>its 2018 everyone should have a titan GTX
>but most people already have a 970 that came with their PC, why do they need a titan?
>what's your point?

You can probably make do with a DSLR.
Just google DSLR book scan and you’ll find a few setup examples.
Pic related.

Attached: image.jpg (332x443, 89K)

Dxo have ratings for lenses. The lens is usually the limitation. But it's more complicated than that. Lenses are usually sharper in the middle than at the edges. And the lens sharpness is a function of the aperture, usually lenses are the sharpest at around F8. But to shoot at F8 and low ISO you need a lot of light and a tripod. Then there is the issue of fitting as much of the picture in the frame as possible. Too wide a lens and only part of the frame will be filled, too narrow and you won't fit everything. If you buy a zoom lens to be able to adjust this then you will generally get a less sharp image as zoom lenses have less resolution than prime lenses. And if you buy a prime lens that has too long focusing distance then compared to the object size then you won't be able to get close enough. And to make matters worse, the physical sensor size decides the crop factor, so a 50mm lens on a full frame sensor will give you a wider field of view than a 50mm on an APSC sensor, etc.

But instead of focusing too much on this stuff (which will end up with you thinking you need a full frame sensor and a prime lens to get optimal results) just "cheat" by stitching multiple shots with a cheap camera. Computational photography is a great way to bypass optical and sensor limitations.

Attached: 2016-02-22_autostiching-scanned-a4-artworks-in-a3-with-hugin_00.jpg (1920x1080, 656K)

I've done this my self, and though it is good in theory, in practice it doesen't work well if you want good (read: poster size prints) results. See:

Modern cellphones are GeForce GT 1030 -tier compared to a good camera.

Attached: hothardware.com.png (696x554, 413K)

How big are they? How detailed are the pictures? Glossy or matte finish? It might be cheaper to buy a copy of the book and cut out the pages and put them on a $50 flatbed scanner.

i haven't had a graphics card since 2005, what the fuck does this mean

Yeah didn't Google build their own equipment because off the shelf stuff was horrible?

This. Probably the best solution if you don't want to break your budget.

Thinking out of the box. I wonder I didn't come up with that. Altought OP might have some R A R E books to scan.

It means you should uninstall gentoo and start playing vidya again