Re: [hylafax-users] Archiving: fax vs. scanning

["Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com>]

On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:24:00AM -0700, Richard Reina wrote:
> I have to image roughly one 1-2 pages of documents for every transaction
> that I do.  Right now I am faxing -- usually I have to photocopy it
> first to make it suitable for faxing -- each document document into the
> hylafax server and renaming the file and moving to a special directory
> to archive it.  Can someone tell me what if any are the advantages to
> using a scanner to image these documents?  I suppose it might save me
> some time and some photocopying,  but the litany of scanners on the
> market is almost overwhelming, from flatbed scanners to document scanner
> (not sure what a document scanner is) that cost sever thousands of
> dollars.  If anyone on the list could shed some light on this topic I
> would appreciate it.

Well, the major advantage is not tying up the phone line...  :-)

In general, I think you'll find it faster to use a directly coupled
scanner, assuming the scanner software can save in a format you can
live with.  

Look up SANE - Scanner Access Not Easy; Google should give you the
homepage address.  The real difference in a "document scanner" is
usually that they have ADF's attached; some such scanners are a)
supported by SANE, and b) available used pretty cheap.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra@baylink.com
Member of the Technical Staff     Baylink
The Suncoast Freenet         The Things I Think
Tampa Bay, Florida        http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 804 5015


____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
 To unsub: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@hylafax.org < /dev/null