[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Rod and Andreas,

Thanks for your comments. I agree that scanning microfilm to capture documents is a slow procedure. The method I use, the tried and true printing out of multiple exposure levels onto paper, gets me there rapidly, avoiding the intermediate steps of scanning microfilm with a scanner and then printing. Don't forget the cost of printing a scanned page in terms of ink as well as the time involved. Depending on whether I'm dealing with a monster document or many smaller ones, I can knock out 200 to 300 pages in a day at the Garber archives, some of these being, of course, multiple exposure levels. At $.30/copy, it gets the job done at a price. Frankly, I just grin and bear it. If you take into account a motel cost of $70/night, you can't push the copy button fast enough.

The screen capture with a digital camera from my microfilm reader is certainly a lesser expensive possibility, although there is the cost of buying a copy of the microfilm roll, a real consideration. IIRC, the price is $30 at Garber, $65 at NARA II. So, at $.30/frame, one can copy 100/200+ frames single shot and not bother with buying the reel. And, those familiar with Garber reels know that the subject matter tends to come in clusters of short documents, with perhaps only a dozen pages of interest on the reel. In this case, buying the reel is foolish, unless...

Unless one is after the photographs. Then we are right back to the proposition of a microfilm scanner. The Canon90 at Garber is not well suited to reproducing photographs.

At NARA II in College Park, the last time I was there researchers were heavily into using them to copy textual documents. Scanners are also allowed at NARA II. Snapping a page is quick and one gets excellent reproduction of what is there. However, you are always bending over the document and being a jack-in-the-box, trying to shoot as straight down as possible, but frequently the page will be distorted. Also, the page may not lay flat, adding to the distortion. Using a scanner or one of the copy machines avoids this problem and electrostatic copies there from textual records are $.15 each, or were the last time I was there. On the other hand, like Garber, printing from microfilm costs $.30 per shot, although this can include 2 frames, assuming you are lucky and they are of the same density and reasonably squarely oriented on the film.

Rod, what do you mean by "vignetting"?

Regards,
Richard