The current version, the LiDE 210, is a better buy, quieter, with better software, and a black interior to maximize resolution
With a few caveats, this is a great little scanner. The best part is that it actually fits in my Targus computer case WITH my laptop. It weighs only 2-3 pds, and runs off USB power---no converter brick to haul around. Scans are sharp and fast.
Unfortunately, the particular design of scanner is that (unlike most fat desktop scanners) it cannot scan 3D objects, therefore text near the spine of a book, which is not in actual and absolute contact with the glass, is very blurry. Nor can you just press down the book---this seems to warp the glass causing blurriness elsewhere on the page, and may even jam the scanning mechanism. Also, the lid is non-removable, which means that you may be out-of-luck if you need to scan part of a large object.
Despite these limitations, the price and exceptional portability may make this series of scanners the choice for scanning books---because books which need to be scanned are usually non-circulating items in libraries or archives.
Compared to other scanners the "frame" framing the glass surface is low and only ca 3/8" wide on the right side. So, if you have a circa 1/2" inside margin, and place the right side of the scanner at the edge of a table, you can scan many books easily. You can get in tighter (to within 3/8") by using a peice of stiff, 1/16" thick, cardboard, ca 8 3/8" X 11", placed behind each page before scanning---it is a pain, but it works.
If you do not plan to carry the scanner around much, you might consider a Canon LiDe 700. It has 2 major advantages. The right edge is actually flush with the glass surface---albeit there is still an unnecessarily wide margin. The lid opens 180 degrees, so you can scan portions of a large object.
Your original must be ABSOLUTELY flat. Since the lid is light, a weight placed on top of the lid can help insure that the original is in full contact with the glass. A ca 1" thick book is about the right weight.
The foam "pressure pad" in the lid is a bit too soft to insure that some originals (such as stiff letters or receipts which have been folded) are pressed sufficiently flat. If you notice this problem place a 8 1/2" X 11" piece of stiff cardboard and close the lid (or a thin book) directly on top of your original.
Although some reviews imply that books thicker than 1" cannot be scanned, because the "EZ-lid" only adjust to accomodate items up to 1" thick---in fact, and despite the instructions, it is not essential to close the lid at all---so there is no practical limit on book thickness. Caveat---if you don't close the lid, and if the entire glass surface is not covered by your book, then cover or shade any exposed glass from bright light (e.g., sunlight through a window or a very bright desk lamp). You can tape a strip of ordinary paper in place for this purpose, if necessary.
Other reviewers have complained about not being able to scan at greater than 1200 dpi. If you want to scan at, say 2400 dpi, you have to type the value in manually in the driver software. However, such scans are slow, and I have found no actual improvement in resolution (detail recorded).
It is true that the scanner draws power only when scanning. That is NOT a great advantage when used with a portable computer as one reviewer implies. At least with my ThinkPad---scanning to a portable running on battery-power very seriously slows down scanning. Plan on having your portable plugged into an AC outlet if you plan to scan more than a few pages.
If you want the best possible scans, you should save to tif---but the only tif files the scanner driver produces are huge uncompressed tif files. Solution: scan from a graphics program which allows you to save files as loss-less tif (LZW compression) which will produce files as small as 1/20 the size with no loss in detail.
If it is incovenient to scan from a graphics program, you can scan to JPG. JPG files are always degraded by compression, but if saved nominally uncompressed, degredation does not become significant unless you repeatedly edit and save the files. Solution: scan as jpg, but convert the files to LZW tif before editing them in any way. LZW tif and uncompressed jpg files of the same image are about the same size
PDF images generally default to ca 300dpi jpg-like compression---acceptable for most photos, but not for text. If you are scanning a mixture of images and text, scan as tif files at 1200 dpi and use Adobe Acrobat (or other pdf editor) to convert the tif files to pdf. Most pdf editors allow you to select the graphics quality---select "highest quality" --- OR a specific dpi --- OR disable "downsampling".
If you scan half-tone (screened) photos from books, magazines, etc. You can use Gausian blur (in your graphics editing program) to improve (descreen) them for viewing and printing. Use the lowest possible value which eliminates the dot pattern: typically, 4 pixels at 1200 dpi, 2 pixels at 600 dpi.
The very best scans are produced by setting the tone curve manually, with all of the various options "off". Pre-defining tone curves for your particular project makes the process a little easier. Unfortunately, you have to "summon" your pre-defined tone curve for each scan. You can define user tone curves, or the all of the scanning settings (including the tone curve) under user names. Note particularly, pay attention when defining "all of the settings" that some of the settings, particularly color, resolution, and auto-tone have not reverted to the defaults. You have to define things in a particular order, or the defaults reset----very annoying.
Don't panic about the scary "unlock the scanner before using" notice in the instructions. If you try to scan with the scanner locked, it will tell you, "unlock me". If so, just unlock it.
This review was original written about the discontinued Canoscan LiDE 90. After several thousand scans, the LiDE 90 began showing irregularities (as faint moire patterns) only when half-tone photos were scanned at 1200dpi and then descreened. So, I purchased an LiDE 200 as a replacement, since I scan everything at 1200 dpi. As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two model is that the LiDE 200 is quieter, and slightly slower. Although the automatic scanning function has nominally been improved, I use instead the "advanced settings". The "advanced settings" portion of the program is unchanged.
If there is no difference between the LiDE 90 and the LiDE 200, is there really any difference between an LiDE 100 and LiDE 200? I doubt it. Note that the 100 is "ugly black" while the 200 is "pretty silver". But guess what? The newer 210 is also "ugly black", presumably to minimize reflected light within the scanner. I bet that in some situations the "ugly black" LiDE 100 produces better scans that the "pretty silver" 200. As far as I can tell, the only difference between a 100 and a 210 is "improved" software features---which I wouldn't use anyway. The "newer" models claim to be 10% or so faster---but note that the 200 is slower than the 90, presumably to improve accuracy.
After setting up the "preferences" in the "advanced settings" of the LiDE 200 driver on my full size computer, I found that I could not change the options. I had to remove then reinstall the software to be able to change the "preferences". So, take care setting up preferences. The only changes I made were to select Preferences > Preview > "Automatically Execute Preview" and "Display the last Frame on Previewed Image". With my Thinkpad, no matter what I do, the software will not remember any advanced settings.
Suggestion to the Canon designers: If the frame was flush with the surface of the glass, and the frame (or margin) was narrower (less than 1/4 inch), at least on one side, this would be a great book scanner. The awkward drivers need major improvement.
