Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.panix3.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: John Forkosh <forkosh@panix.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Dumb Pinter Question
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 08:25:24 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <tu9gpk$dn7$1@reader2.panix.com>
References: <ttomog$326d$1@dont-email.me> <kWCdnQ6yMK5eh535nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> <ttpbh8$ek5$1@reader2.panix.com> <9FKdnSx-aYhJ5pz5nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <ttscvk$279gm$61@dont-email.me> <mPednQDuEtC4aJ_5nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <ttv6pf$urec$1@dont-email.me> <-MKdnaGEcp-jap75nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> <tu1j53$ned$1@reader2.panix.com> <17ydnXi6-MG65Zj5nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@earthlink.com> <6405822a@news.ausics.net> <tu4963$777$3@reader2.panix.com> <ELKcndesYYxIc5j5nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@earthlink.com> <od7jdjx7l7.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <tu6t2s$474$1@reader2.panix.com> <6sgjdjx7de.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <6407b5fd@news.ausics.net> <tu977l$r3m$1@reader2.panix.com> <64082685@news.ausics.net> <85ycnQZwKuzisJX5nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 08:25:24 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader2.panix.com; posting-host="panix3.panix.com:166.84.1.3"; logging-data="14055"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
User-Agent: tin/2.6.0-20210823 ("Coleburn") (NetBSD/9.3 (amd64))
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:37489

28B.I874 <28B.I874@noabzba.net> wrote:
> <<snip>>
>   Somebody suggested using two good flatbed scanners
>   fixed in a "V" formation for the abovementioned
>   "bound notebooks". Not the worst idea - and perhaps
>   cheaper than the Hassleblad solution depending.

That sounds like a really good idea, which some manufacturer
could produce pretty easily and affordably. The typical
off-the-shelf scanners, that I'm aware of, are too "thick"
to place in an (inverted) V formation, and have borders
around the edges whereby stuff near the spine of a book
or notebook placed on them would be missed. But I'd guess
some easy-for-manufacturers (but maybe not for individuals)
modifications to existing and inexpensive retail scanners
could do the trick. But I'm further guessing there's just
not enough demand for this kind of device.
-- 
John Forkosh  ( mailto:  j@f.com  where j=john and f=forkosh )