Check out Santa's new ride Beauty Best Books of the Year Black Friday Deals Week nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc For a limited time. 3 months for $0.99. Amazon Music Unlimited. New subscribers only. Terms and conditions apply. STEM $24.99 for a limited time only Try it first with samples Handmade Gift Shop Home and Garden Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon Black Friday deals: save 40% or more on Amazon Video Black Friday deals: save 40% or more on Amazon Video Black Friday deals: save 40% or more on Amazon Video  Echo Plus  Black Friday Deals Week: Fire tablets starting at $29.99. Limited-time offer. $30 off Kindle Paperwhite Shop Now HTL17_gno

on August 10, 2010
I just KNEW this product was out there somewhere! I kept thinking, "Surely I'm not the only person who has hundreds of photos to scan and can't afford to take weeks to do it!" I kept looking, reading reviews, and looking some more. There was no way I was going to take 5 minutes - or even 2 minutes - per picture, previewing, scanning, cropping, adjusting. All I wanted to do was get decent, quick scans from old photos, good enough to post on Facebook. This little gem turned out to be perfect for what I needed.

PROS: This model will handle up to 8.5 by 11 inch photos. There is an adjustable guide to help you feed pictures into the slot, but I found I didn't really even need to use it as long as I positioned the photo up against the left edge of the scan path.

Scans are very quick. At the default setting, a 4x6 photo takes approx. 20 seconds to scan and save. Everything is automatic. You put a picture in the slot. The scanner feeds it through - fast! When the light stops blinking, you scan another. I sat there watching TV, feeding one shot after another through the unit without a hitch.

One of the best features is that you don't have to be connected to a computer. If you're not connected via the USB cord, photos are automatically saved on the SD card. (The unit comes with a 1GB card, which hold hundreds of photos. HINT: After you install the scanning software from the SD card during setup, you can delete the scan software from the SD card. You'll free up lots of room for more photos. Just be sure to save a copy of the software somewhere, because I could not find a way to download it from the manufacturer's Web site.) You could take this unit to your family reunion, sit at a table with the relatives, and scan in photo after photo. When you get home, you can transfer the photos to your computer, or just pop the SD card into your digital photo frame. (I scanned about 350 photos and had them uploaded and posted to Facebook photo albums in about 3 hours.) Of course, if you'd prefer to connect and scan directly to your computer via USB cable (included), that is easy to do as well.

CONS: You have very little control over the scan settings. You choose either 300 dpi (dots per inch) or 600 dpi. (300 dpi is fine for posting photos online.)

You have no control over how the photo files are named when they are saved on the SD card or on your computer. (They are just numbered sequentially.)

You will need another software program if you need to manipulate the images after scanning (cropping, adjusting colors and brightness, etc.) The software that comes with the scanner does not have any editing functions. I recommend IRFANVIEW, a superb freeware photo editing program [...]
It would have been really nice if the unit could have operated on batteries. Then you would not even have needed to use the power cord (included)! Maybe next model...

BOTTOM LINE: If you need museum-quality scans for posterity or super high resolution scans for enlarging, get yourself a good flatbed scanner and digital photo editing software. It takes a lot of money, time and effort to get scans that good.

But if you just need quick, decent quality photo scans for sharing via email or posting online, this may be exactly what you're looking for.

NOTE: After now doing approx. 500 scans, I have not had any of the problems with lines across the image that some reported. I do use the little cleaning swab (included) about every 50 scans as suggested by the manufacturer.
1111 comments| 639 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 9, 2010
I am a pretty serious amateur photographer with several boxes and bags of old photographs, many (but not all) of which have negatives. Over the years, I have owned and used several flat bed and film scanners. I have a lot of experience with them.

They are all terribly S-L-O-W. And they all require a remarkable amount of attention -- if you are going to use a flat bed scanner or a film scanner, you have to load the device, get it up on your computer, scan, and save the file. It takes a few minutes per image, and it's nearly impossible to do anything else at the same time.

Enter the Pandigital scanner. I'm watching the ball game. Or a movie. I plug in and turn on the scanner (the person who said it is about the size of the tube from paper towels is correct). I get one of my boxes of photos, and I start leafing though them. I find a photo I like and hold it up against the scanner's "slot". The photo is smoothly taken from my hands and starts it's progress through the scanner. It all takes about 5 to 8 seconds, and the photo emerges on the other side. Scanning time, and convenience, is about the same, whether it's a 2 by 3 or an 8 by 10, or anything in between (most of my photos are 3-1/2 by 5 and 4 by 6).

About two seconds after that, the light on the scanner stops flashing, and I insert another photo. If I'm watching the terminally slow Boston Red Sox, I will probably start to scan a second photo before the pitcher throws another pitch! One morning, while watching the Sunday news shows, I scanned over 130 photos. Finally, I got to my computer and upload all of my images from the included memory card.

The results -- (1) the photos are very squarely recorded; they do not need to be cropped or straightened in order to be usable. (2) The DO need to be rotated. Photos may come in upside down or need clockwise or counter-clockwise turning. Many programs will handle this (I use something called "Thumbsplus" which will do the turning in "bulk"). (3) Some of the photos will benefit from being brightened (I use the same program for that too). The content seems to all be there -- after brightening, I still have a great scan. (4) So far, out of just under 300 scans, I had TWO that had lines on them. I do make a point of wiping off obvious grit or dirt on the photos if I perceive that as a problem. (5) I haven't tried making LARGE reprints out of my scans. Certainly, 4 by 6s look great. I suppose that for my finest "artwork", I might do a serious film scan, but for all the old family photos that I want to be digitally preserved, this absolutely does a first rate job.

This is just a GREAT gadget. I have recommended it to everyone I know.
77 comments| 56 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 11, 2010
I'm an atypical user of this product -- few of my scans are of images. However, I use this product several times each week for another purpose: document management.

This scanner works very well for document archival. This becomes even more true when you have a large volume of papers to scan. Here's a common workflow:
1) Receive and open mail,
2) Separate "keep" and "recycle" portions,
3) Scan all items in "keep" pile,
4) Recycle items in "keep" pile.

In a matter of minutes I'm able to process any amount mail I received that day (home use). The same applies to receipts and similar documents.

Scan quality is above average, especially considering the speed of the scans and the cost of the unit. I've used flatbed and sheet-fed scanners three times this price and had inferior results. Photographic images I've scanned have reasonable color accuracy. Graphite (pencil), ink, charcoal and pastel drawings I've scanned are also of very reasonable quality. Note that in this use of "reasonable" I am saying it is satisfactory for normal use and do not imply any hesitation of recommendation.

Two items which separate its "I really like it" recommendation from "I love it" are: no battery power option (though a home-made adapter with alkaline batteries could likely power it) and the lack of support for Legal size (8.5" x 14") documents. Neither of those items are claimed features, so I don't fault the unit for lacking them. This is an excellent product. If you need to archive a large number of documents or images, or want an easy way to regularly process similar, buy this product!
77 comments| 46 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on July 15, 2010
I received the Panscn06 yesterday. I read the manual, hooked up the scanner to my PC, loaded the software from the supplied sd card, and started scanning pictures into Picasa. I was able to scan photos of all sizes from 3 x 5 up to 8 1/2 x 11. It even took some Poloroids. I have not encountered any problems such as lines in the scanned photos. Today I brought the portable scanner to work and while on break, pluged the scanner into an outlet, scanned 17 photos to the sd card in a couple of minutes, and tonight, I will load them on my home computer. So far, I love it.
22 comments| 109 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 21, 2010
I just got my Pandigital Photolink One-Touch PANSCN06 8.5-Inch x11-Inch Photo Scanner (PANSCN06) and scanned in about 20 4X6 photos. All I can say is Wow. What Speed. The photos are transfered to a JPG file straight onto the included SD card (a 1 GB card was included in the box, how nice!) After you turn the scanner on it starts defalults to the 300 dpi mode which is indicated by a Green LED light. If you press the power button again the GREEN LED power light changes to an Orange LED light and the scanner will now scan in 600 dpi mode.

A single 4X6 photo in the default 300 dpi mode takes about 3 seconds to scan in, the 600 dpi takes about 10 seconds. A full sheet of 8.5X11" paper takes about 7 seconds at 300 dpi to scan but, since the paper is constantly moving so you get the sense that it's going as fast as it can.

The Picture quality is quite acceptable for the photos I tested. I do not have any high resolution photos on hand to compare the two scan settings. Either way this scanner is not going to be able to compete with flatbed scanners having a density of 9600X4800 dpi. It's not for that! In other words, the scanner is not going to magically "sharpen" 3X5 or 4X6 photos over and above the resolution they were taken with. However, the picture on the computer screen (1920X1080) look very much like the original photos. I did not notice much difference comparing a 300 dpi scan with a 600 dpi scan. This isn't because the 600 dpi isn't working, it was because the orignial photos were not so sharp themselves that higher resolution waranted any further rsolution. If the original photo was taken with a shakey holder of the camera then digitizing that event isn't magically going to make it dissapear. For that kind of Magic, You need artistic photoshop skills.

I have software that can print JPG files into a PDF. So I was able to scan a document and several photos and select all of them within the context menu of my file manager and combined them all into a single PDF - pics and photos! Was kind of cool. I am not sure I need to do this routinely but it is nice to be able to do so. With the purchase of this scanner I now have a very convenient document scanner in addition to a picture scanner and will no longer be on the hook to the wife for this task. 1 honey dew taken off the list. YaY ME. The wife is thrilled about how easy it is to gents, get yourselves a brownie point or two with this purchase. lol...

I have not seen any lines in photos or scans as yet. If my unit physically breaks down be assured I will update this review to state so and how long it lasted. If I haven't its still working.

If you need a convenient scanner for digitizing photos or documents you won't be dissapointed with this. I was torn on the line beteen buying a higher quality scanner or this. If you are waffling about it my advice is to try this first and then see how bothered you are about needing the higher quality. You'll probably decide as I did that this fits the need.
22 comments| 22 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 11, 2010
I'm a Creative Memories consultant, and have changed from making traditional scrapbooks to creating digital storybooks. So... I wanted a simple way to change the 20+ years of snapshots cluttering my closets into digital format and put them to use. Others have commented the scanned photos have lines. If you remember these were snapshots taken at less than 300 dpi, sometimes with a basic camera, why is this a surprise? Once the Pandigital was calibrated, the lines were minimized. I used several of the scans in a storybook, and printed the pages from my home printer. There is no evidence of lines on the finished storybook pages. My conclusion - this is a simple to use, very portable scanner. I will use it for converting snapshots into digital format. For the past several weeks, I've only needed the home 3-in-1 scanner for one item larger than 8.5 x 11" ... I can scan and re-label about 50 photos per hour while watching t.v. I'm fully satisfied with this product, and have no hesitation recommending it to others for this type of use.
33 comments| 25 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
Enthusiast: CookingVINE VOICEon February 27, 2011
I've scanned about 300 photos without the problems others have complained about with white lines. So far I'm very impressed with this scanner. I have thousands of old photos waiting to be scanned. I spent months scanning about 1,000 of them on flatbed scanners before giving up on the project; scanning is a slow, labor-intensive process that results in images that usually need to be cleaned up. When I saw this product I thought I'd give it a try, especially since Amazon's return policy makes it fairly painless to send an unsatisfactory item back.

What I have found is that it takes me much longer to remove a photo from an album and replace it than to scan it. I use the default 300 dpi setting, and a scan takes about 3 seconds. I took it to work and digitized our album of 210 staff photos in under 2 hours; I estimate that I was scanning 125 pictures an hour. I expect to double that speed when I start scanning my old family photos that are stored loose in boxes. With that speed I wouldn't expect the scan quality to be great, but the quality of the sharpness and color is much better than I have gotten from my flatbed scanners; what I see on the screen matches the photo beautifully. I can switch the resolution from 300 to 600 dpi; that doubles the scan time as well as the file size, but I find it unnecessary for the vast majority of my old photos.

My scanner came with a 512MB SD card; I see that another reviewer reported receiving a larger card with his or her scanner. I tried scanning to the card and then putting that card into my PC's card reader, but I got a message that the card was unreadable and needed to be formatted. I was hesitant to do so, because there is software on that SD card that allows you to scan to your computer rather than to an SD card and I couldn't find a way to download the software from the Pandigital website. I tried scanning to another SD card I already owned, and it worked beautifully. I contacted Pandigital support but didn't get a reply; I emailed Amazon to see if they could just send me the software, but their almost-immediate reply was that they had shipped me a whole new unit to be delivered the next day! When the new SD card had the same problem, I tried connecting the scanner to my PC, and the PC recognized the scanner/SD card as a new device, and I was able to read the card that way. When Pandigital finally replied to my inquiry several days later they told me to reformat the card and omitted any mention of the software; so I don't hold any great hope for quality tech support for the product.

I have not used the included plastic sleeve when scanning; my old photos have gone through the scanner easily without using it. Some of the pictures feed in a bit crooked; I have found that it is too much trouble to use the slider to stabilize the photos, as sizes and orientations of various photos means I waste a lot of time adjusting the slider. Instead I have found that I can use my right index finger to steady the picture and feed the picture as straight as the slider can.

One word of warning: if you want a scanner that scans documents or printed material (such as pictures from magazines), this may not be suitable; the manual specifically warns against scanning such items, although it doesn't say what damage this might cause.
22 comments|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 16, 2011
I purchased this product about a month ago, but just got around to trying it out last night. I tested 3 photos first and was pleased at the results.

I have several old photo albums (from the late 1960s) that I wanted to salvage and share with my siblings. I knew my big scanner would take hours to scan all these photos. So, after seeing a recommendation on a scrapbooking website and reading the reviews here, I decided to give it a try.

Instructions are clear and easy to follow. Set up was very simple. Quality of the scans at 600 dpi is very good considering the age of the photographs. It took me around 20 minutes to scan 75 photos, so I was very pleased with the speed.

The only problem I had was with feeding some of the photos into the scanner. The weight of the photo paper was thicker on some of the photos and I found those more difficult to feed. By tipping the photo up slightly, they fed easier. In a few cases, I had to use the plastic sleeve that was provided with the scanner.

All in all, I'd say this was well worth purchasing.
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 11, 2010
Received this amazing little unit yesterday & scanned a ton of pictures already ranging in size from wallets to 8.5" X 11". Every photo scanned perfectly on the 1st try. (I did not use the included sleeves as many other people suggested in their reviews.) Perfect quality on every photo (used the 600 dpi setting) and they still only took seconds each to scan. After they were scanned, I uploaded them to Shutterfly to create a photo book. I have an older flat bed type scanner that works just fine but takes several minutes per picture & you have to go through several steps in the process. Not only is the Pandigital Scanner way faster, the quality is even better! I have very pleased with this purchase! I literally pluged it in to the wall, attach the included USB cable to my laptop & was scanning photos in minutes-- I didn't even open the included directions!
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 31, 2010
I bought the Pandigital Photolink One-Touch scanner after reading many other reviews, so I was aware of the possibility of lines showing on some of my scans. But many others reported no lines or found that by periodic cleaning, they could be eliminated. With all of the positive reviews about the portability, speed and ease of use, I figured I'd try it.

The product was delivered promptly and was very easy to setup. I ran the install software that came on the MicroSD for my MacBook so that I could scan directly to a folder on my hard drive, bypassing the MicroSD. That worked fine.

Then I proceeded to scan at 600dpi. I looked at some of the pictures in Preview, and they looked fine. I scanned a bunch more, then did an import into iPhoto. Generally, they looked good. Now, I'm pretty much a novice at iPhoto and photo editing in general, but I'm a pretty savvy computer user by profession. There were two things about the photos that I wanted to change: First, it looked to me that the backgrounds in the pictures were pretty dark when compared to the original photo. These are all pictures of people. The people looked bright enough, but the backgrounds and looked too dark. Second, the images were "soft" or a little fuzzy/out of focus compared to the originals. They didn't look bad and if I wasn't comparing side by side, it probably would have been acceptable.

However, I started playing around with some of the settings in iPhoto. First, I adjusted the sharpness setting which returned focus quite nicely. It also seemed to bring out a few of the scan artifacts (dust?) which looked like white particles here and there. Not bad, really. Then I adjusted the shadow setting which brightened up the background nicely. That's when I saw the lines. (I actually played with all of the settings, but these are the two I ended up wanting to adjust). There were typically 5-15 lines on each photo, and on virtually every photo I had scanned. You can't see them in the bright areas of the photos, they kind of blend in. And they are there in the background, but the scan darkens the background so that they don't show.

I tried to recalibrate using the directions provided, and I also used the cleaning tool several times, but neither seemed to make any noticeable difference.

Then I tried using the retouch tool. It was pretty good at eliminating the lines, blending them back into the background. If I want to spend 4-5 minutes per picture, I can sharpen it, brighten up the shadows and then retouch it to where the scan artifacts and lines are gone, and it looks pretty good. Also, when zooming in to retouch, I noticed that there was a horizontal "fault crack" about 1/4" from the bottom along most of the pictures. It's as if the feed mechanism had a hiccup at the same place on each photo. It was not real noticeable unless you zoomed in, but it was there.

It probably would have been OK if I had not made any adjustments and left it soft with a dark background. For the purposes of experiencing the photo, I would have been satisfied. However, once I saw that the lines appear when I try to make the photo look more like the original, I was unhappy with the value I received for my money. I am returning it now and looking at a flatbed scanner.
0Comment| 8 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse