Dear All,
    Please forgive a contribution from a geriatric. As long ago as 1987, this writer was paid to undertake research upon all the issues for digitising sound collections, and a pilot project was set up. This included attempts at digitising LP sleeves, as well as the sound inside. As a copyright-deposit library, we in Britain were permitted to make copies for reasons of preservation and access, and my report was published (I don't have it here, so I can't give you a reference!)
    We transferred about twenty LPs and digitised their sleeves. Three issues arose, which have not so far been addressed in this discussion :
(1) Aliassing occured between pixels and half-tone pictures, unless both excellent equipment and viewing-conditions were assured, so the operator could minimise the aliassing.
(2) The text (generally on the back of the LP sleeve) needed optical character recognition, (a) so it might be translated, and (b) so it might be sent down a wire to British Library listener, who might manipulate it to make it more readable, or conduct a word-search. The OCR software was almost impotent with proper nouns!
(3) Five years after we did those twenty sleeves, the software was out of date.
Peter Copeland
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Walker/Amigos [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 11 August 2003 15:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Scanning LP covers
Joel, 
 
 I read many of the messages regarding the issue of scanning LP covers.

In my opinion, an oversize scanner would be the simplest and most effective option for your money.

In most digital imaging projects where digital cameras are used, the cameras (or camera backs) alone can cost 10,000 dollars or more.  The lighting, power supplies and a studio impervious to vibration are extras.   Often it takes a minute or more to scan one object.  Even if you choose a less expensive digital camera, you will still spend a great deal of time and money ensuring that the lighting will be adequate enough to capture the detail and color.   If you use a conventional camera and then scan the slides or prints you will lose a lot of color fidelity in the translation.

Also, as in digital audio, it is best to scan at high resolution and then scale down for other applications such as delivery on the web.  

The beauty of a flat-bed scanner is that it has its own lighting source and adjustable resolution.  A camera may have some zooming capability but the resolution settings on a scanner are much more finely adjustable.   If you plan to use these images in a printed publication, you will need very high-resolution images.  

I hope this helps,
=============================
Bill Walker
Imaging Field Services Officer
Amigos Library Services
14400 Midway Road
Dallas, TX 75244-3509
Phone: 800-843-8482 x153
Fax 972-991-6061
Email: [log in to unmask]
============================= 


**************************************************************************


Now exhibiting at the British Library Galleries:


Painted Labyrinth : the world of the Lindisfarne Gospels


Until 28 September 2003. Admission Free.


*************************************************************************


The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the [log in to unmask] : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.


The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.


*************************************************************************