Andrew,
I disagree with you about scan quality. It depends on the scan process. A scan will not make the photo any better than the original (although with photo software, you can often improve the appearance and sometimes, the detail that was recorded in the photo). A high quality scan will deliver all of the detail of the original, but it does create a large electronic file. Take a look at some of the old glass plate and early negative photos available on the Denver Public Library site. The files are relatively small, but the detail is fantastic; capable of being enlarged 5 to 10 times with no pixilation. You can't enlarge a photo in a book to see detail better. You are limited to the quality of the reproduction and it's size as presented. Which brings up another point. The photos in books are all some sort of reproduction. Those in Randy Daniel's new caboose book are digital reproductions at very high quality. Older books use different processes to reproduce photos, but they are all technically scans at various quality levels. I have two copies of Corbin's "Burlington in Transition". One is a later edition and the photo reproduction in it are not as good as the original.
As for carrying the books, if I tried to take all four of Mike Spoor's Q books and Bernard Corbin's two Q books with me, I would have quite a load to carry. If I could download the same books to my laptop, it would weigh the same as it does without them. Furthermore, I can take the laptop almost anywhere, except where it might get wet. I wouldn't want the books there either. If I have a printer available, I can print any photo (or part of a photo detail) that I need in hard copy form. Like you, I like books, but my books are not always available to me. Right now, I am at my daughter's home, 400 miles away from my library. Tablet computers make even more sense. For a couple hundred dollars, (the price of many HO locomotives today) you can get one that will hold many digital books. On most current models, the print and photo reproduction is outstanding and very convenient. You could easily set a tablet on your work table with reference photos that can be scrolled or enlarged as needs. It won't take up as much space as any book you have.
I have the complete file of Trains Magazine on my computer and I can access that a lot better than I can my actual hard copies. Model Railroader and other magazines are available in the same manner.
Bill Barber Gravois Mills, MO Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:21 am (PDT) . Posted by:Having a digital library of books is one thing, but having the hard copy
will render photos that will be easier to make out what they are, as some
pictures as they get scanned they also get slightly pixilated, and harder
to see details of what is in the photograph, i.e. details on a steam
locomotive, diesel locomotive, passenger cars, or rolling stock. I also
prefer to read an actual hard copy of a book over a digital book as a hard
copy you can take with you, and where I work I do not want to bring my
computer with me everyday to read a book
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___
|