Microfilm Image Comparison: Scanned vs. Printed

Just as a quick follow-up to my previous post about file format issues with scanned microfilm images:

The question was asked whether or not the scanned image produces a better image. In a word, yes. In pictures, see below. Both images were from my research yesterday. You can easily see why, after needing two copies of each page so that one side of each was readable, I switched to the scanner. The experimental technique of adjusting light/darkness would have ended up costing me a fortune in copies and been a huge waste of paper and time. The scanner got it on the first try. Even if you’ve been intimidated by these scanners, I hope the image comparison below will convince you to jump in with both feet! (Click image for full size)

Comparison of printed versus scanned microfilm images. Click image for full size file.

This entry was posted in How-To. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Microfilm Image Comparison: Scanned vs. Printed

  1. avatar Nancy says:

    Thanks for this illustration, Chris. I will opt for a scanner the next time I need microfilm copies — IF the facility has a scanner.

  2. avatar Mark Olsen says:

    This is great. High tech can certainly save time and money and produce better results at times.