http://www.diybookscanner.org/forum/pos ... 14&p=18783
I have 3 Plustek OpticBook 3600s, one of which I bought new in 2010 from Amazom UK and the rest second-hand over ebay since then.
About 12-18 months ago the Amazon one developed something like the pixel fault, having previously (2-3 years after purchase) blown its AC power adaptor (which latter I replaced with a generic obtained from a specialist UK supplier of same - the all-purpose variable power bricks and switchable heads/plugs from the likes of Maplin did not fit the power socket on the back of the 3600, surprise, surprise). Of the two obtained used, one on return home with it turned out to have a dead lamp, but otherwise was in good condition so I removed the lamp/transport assembly from the other and installed that. Working fine since.
Hard to estimate how much scanning I've done with the Amazon one but it has been a LOT - most I can recall in one day was over 2000 pages.
Edge proximity scanning not that great, bit over about 1cm at best. But better for books than my old Canoscan 300 or other flatbed.
I'd been planning to get the Avision FB2280E for its 2mm from edge capability and relatively modest price but seems the last has gone from Amazon in UK:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B004 ... 1_1&sr=8-1
so now looking at the OpticBook 4800 which claims the 2mm from edge capability plus LED for scan illumination. Pricey IMO at gbp430+
Scanning ancient books cheaply printed on acid paper I've found the 3600 seems to pick up an awful lot of noise in the way of ink flecks, smudges and so on from the original, and that this makes for a lot of cleaning up work in ScanTailor. Maybe that means the scanner is faithfully reproducing the originals... nevertheless it could be interesting to compare the output of the 4800 with its LED illumination.
Incidentally, that is scanning at the usual 300dpi and in b&w - I have noted that a scan in greyscale which is then output as b&w by ST produces a marginally cleaner look but still lots of work in ST.
One basic thing the OpticBook alerted me to which appears to be overlooked sometimes in discussions here about post-processing is the enormous improvement in image quality that can be had by inserting a blind/blank page behind that being scanned, particularly where the book's paper is very thin. This means slightly more time taken in scanning by positioning the blind page each pass, but worth it.