Batch Photo Scanner that scans at 1200dpi

[ZombiePhysicist]

What is the best batch photo scanner that has a Automatic Document Feeder (ADF) and that can do 1200dpi optical resolution?*

So far, the closest thing I found is the Kodak PS50 and PS80 (I cannot tell the difference between them except that the PS80 seems to scan faster at 300dpi, but the same speed at 600dpi). And the batch feeder in the PS80 can hold 50 (instead of 25) photos in its feeder.
https://ezphotoscan.zendesk.com/hc/...dak-Picture-Saver-Scanner-PS50-PS80-Equipment

The problem with those scanners is they can only do 1200dpi interpolated but not optically. I know most of the 'experts' have said that 300dpi color is enough to capture full quality photos, but I have proven, to myself, that is false. I've done tests on flatbed scanners and determined that you can detect (albeit subtle) differences in quality up to 1200dpi (particularly with good black and white photos), and above that, there seems to be no describable difference (to me).

I need this high quality because I have a lot of physical photos I want to scan. They are deteriorating just sitting in books/boxes, and I want to get them in the best quality possible, so that if the originals get destroyed, I won't care.

The only other thing I've found was an ancient discontinued Epson Perfection 3590 Photo scanner and it does over 1200dpi (3200dpi):
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?oid=53540927

With an optional ADF multi photo reader:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...ap=y&c3api=1876,52934714882,&is=REG&A=details


Has anyone found any modern solution that can do 1200dpi, or is the now ancient Epson 3590 the best I can hope for?

Thanks for any help!


*Sorry if this is not the right sub group. Looked and wasn't sure what would be the right group, and figured the Mac Pro group would be most likely to have come up on a solution to this. Let me know if there is a better group, and I'll move the thread there.
[doublepost=1470176108][/doublepost]Ug, so there is a better group. Couldn't figure out how to delete this thread. For those that may be curious, apparently we have a digital photography sub group. duh on me.

https://forums.macrumors.com/forums/digital-photography.83/

 

[ActionableMango]

I'd be wary of that old Epson scanner... I used one of those many years ago, possibly a different model though, and there were two problems that come to mind. The first is that the Epson software for Windows was pretty crappy, almost never updated, and I wouldn't be certain that it would run on a current versions of Windows. I don't remember if it was compatible with OS X at all--we only had one Mac at the time and it wasn't connected to the scanner.

The second is that even though there was an ADF and therefore you didn't have to physically cycle the photos, you could not do a batch scan of a whole stack of photos. Every single photo was a laborious, multi-step, slow process due to the software. Add to that how slow a hi-DPI scan was, and you realize that the ADF only shaved off a small percentage of the overall scanning time. You could probably get around this with one of those software packages that records mouse movement and then repeats it without human presence needed. I haven't tried this myself, but I've seen it done in the lab for user simulations repeated over the weekend.

Also we were not a very sophisticated outfit, perhaps there is third party software that could make better use of the scanning hardware than the included, free Epson software. I really know very little about this stuff, but I thought I'd share what I do know.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

VueScan seems to recognize the epson and ADF and can batch feed/scan ok.

The problem with the epson/adf combo is it doesn't handle larger format photos through the ADF. Also, it's rollers seem a touch harsh on the photos, I wouldn't want to put anything fragile through it. But that's likely the case for other ADFs as well. It's not what I'd call 'fast' either.

 

[ActionableMango]

You probably don't want to do this, but I'll just throw it out there anyway.

The Wirecutter reviewed 37 photo scanning services and they found one they really liked. You might consider a scanning service as a better use of your money or time.

Here is their detailed article about it:
http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-photo-scanning-service/

I don't know if any of these places would meet your exacting standards, but you could try them out first with just a small handful of prints.