Hacker News Reader

Comment by matdwyer | Hacker News Reader

Disclosure - My company (PhotoScanning.ca) scans photos in bulk in Canada

I have run extensive tests with DSLR cameras, trying to approach the level of quality that you'd get from an entry level scanner. My research project in uni was on this topic. It just isn't there yet, even with these prosumer cameras and high quality lenses. The concept is good, and it works for a $30,000 hasselblad, but this will produce brutal copies from an iPhone 4S.

I'd love it if this was possible in any reasonable form as I'd abandon scanning and go to this method. In a millisecond.

Trying to justify that it is OK based on a 550 DPI is ridiculous as well - sure, the photo is large enough, but the optics inside the camera are not.

Do your own tests and see, but this is gimmicky to the extreme

View on HN

http://assets.1000memories.com/blog_posts/iphone4s_1.JPG was taken with our app. Not a gimmick.

Almost all of the photos we (1000memories employees) upload to our site are through the iPhone app, and we're more than pleased with the results.

Well, again being a bit biased, I'd say that I couldn't give that to a customer. It looks like there is significant flash reflection (or another light source) on the mid right and left. (Also, to note, my company focuses value over quality, so we're doing "consumer" level scans)

Don't get me wrong - I WANT this to work. I've spent hours trying to get the quality to an acceptable level. I love the concept and am 100% convinced that it will replace scanning in the near future.

I guess I should rephrase to explain that this is likely good enough to send a quick email to my mom, or post on my wall, but using this method as a substitute for a higher quality method is leaving a lot on the table.

Quick is the key here. Less inertia needs to be overcome for someone to use this app than for someone to send their photos off to a scanning service.

You sound like the photo version of a wine snob.

LOL - Again, I don't even focus on quality - our scans are 7¢ each, done in auto-feed scanners. I'm not talking technical at all, if it looks good, if it is a reasonable duplication of the original, then I'm good with it.

I'm saying that from my tests, doing the same photos with DSLR, point and shoot, auto feed, and high quality (epson 10000xl, creo, etc) then viewing on monitor, reprinted, ipad, etc. that there is a significant jump between the scans and the pictures. It is very noticeable, and 9/10 people that I talked to weren't happy with it (after seeing better options as well)

I'm sorry if I'm offending people here - I'm a gadget nerd first and I think it is cool. I've said that like three times. I just don't like how it is positioned as replacement of scans - if a user is expecting something that is better then what the service is able to deliver, they will be disappointed. Maybe I'm in the minority on that thinking

I had a tough moment deciding between the Shoeboxed and Shoebox logos in the app store.

You're absolutely right, but I think you overestimate the general public's preferences with regards to quality. From low bitrate mp3's, video clips (movies or otherwise), laptop speakers, car speakers, computer monitors, etc. there has always been a multitude of products / services people just want to work, and could care less about whether they're high quality (within reason, of course).

I would never use this service, but I would be willing to wager there are a lot of people who could care less about the quality of preservation (again, within reasonable range).

Scanners are great. Who has a scanner these days? I appreciate that there might be a better solution, but this seems pretty pragmatic. And looking at the results, it also is pretty damn good.

Actually I know lots of people with scanners. Somewhat counter-intuitively, these people tend to be the least technical of those that I know.

Most of the tech-heavy people I know have pretty much abandoned personal printers, but the non-techies still have and use them, and most of them are using multifunction devices that scan/copy/print.

In my purely anecdotal world, this app is then a good solution for the techies who have a smartphone but no scanner. On the flip side, those techies tend not be the type to collect tons of sentimental photos, so I'm not sure how large the market would be.

I scanned some photos last night, actually. I thought for a few moments about how many years I've had the scanner and how nothing has replaced it yet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com