• Wistful@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    Wow that seems painfully slow/tedious. Why isn’t it automatized? I think I saw a robot do like 20 pages a second on a yt some years ago.

    • Dave@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Google have digitised a lot of books using some more advanced tech, though they started out with something a little like this.

    • prenatal_confusion@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      That would be interesting to see!

      This is probably the method that gives you the best quality (deskewing, lighting) without cutting the back of the book and feeding it into a scanner. (AFAIK)

      I saw a book scanner similar to this one that used a vacuum to turn pages but otherwise same principle.

    • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Do you remember the results of those speed scans? Crooked pages, parts of the document cut off, blurry scans, etc.

      It was a lazy method that resulted in a lot of junk data.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Firefox: Video can’t be played because the file is corrupt.

    Chrome: Plays audio only.

    Why are we hosting things on such shonky shit?

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Shockingly, it plays for me (both a/v) on iOS (in the voyager app)

      There is no audio outside of the sound of pages turning and the machine beeping in between so you aren’t missing much in this case

    • AnActOfCreation@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      What OS are you on? The video plays fine for me in Firefox on both Windows and Android.

      Also I think the codec is more likely to blame than the hosting provider.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Windows 10.

        When I download it I can play it in VLC, and according to MediaInfo HEVC encoding.

        Is HEVC support not included by default? Chrome should support it, and Firefox shouldn’t support it at all according to the compatibility charts.

        Maybe there’s some site bullshittery going on and the site is giving out different versions of the file to different people based on region or something. The file it gives me is 2,661,216 bytes. Is that what you get?

        Edit: Works in Edge, although feel like I now have to go wash my hands after firing that up.

        • AnActOfCreation@programming.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Ok I take it back. It plays in Firefox on Android, but not on Windows. Also on Android, it didn’t play at first, I had to refresh. I don’t know what’s going on lol.

          I kinda doubt catbox.moe is doing any kind of smart distribution. It’s a pretty simple file hosting site.

          • Blackmist@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Found it. My Chrome has “Hardware-accelerated video decode” disabled. Apparently there’s no software fall back there, so it just claims no knowledge of them.

            Kind of sucks that Firefox can’t play them, something to do with licensing.

  • Ohi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    We so appreciate your efforts, but ya’ll need more funding so you can start working smart and not hard. From the looks of things, I see no reason why page flips can’t be automated there.

    I just made a donation. Please use it to save this poor woman from the tedious task you’ve shown us today.

    • activ8r@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      We should start doing charity style TV ads.

      “You, too, can help us build page turners and save the lives of dozens of archivists. Just £2 a month will allow Margaret to finally rest.”

      • theRealBassist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Man I got some friends who are archivists, and they’d love that shit lol.

        They love their field, but it’s a lot of mind-numbing work

    • IndefiniteBen@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think this is one of those things that seems like it should be easy to automate, but actually has lots of hidden complexity.

      They probably don’t use this to scan commonly available books, because for those you can just cut the spine off the book and scan the pages in a regular scanner.

      This is likely used for books that need to be preserved and can’t be damaged during the scanning process.

      How do you make a machine that will always turn exactly one page and never tear a page, while adapting for different page sizes and thicknesses, and avoiding the static charge that can make pages stick together? All for less money than it costs to pay people to operate this machine.

      • droans@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        Iirc they did experience with automation before and did get it to copy well…

        But like you said, it would damage books pretty frequently. That’s not what you’d want for old and fragile materials which are rather irreplaceable.

  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t often donate since it’s mostly in USD, but internet archive was one of the few that I did.

  • blazeknave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    May I bring my son to visit? I know it’s typically only for events. He will crack up at the statues and be underwhelmed by the two racks containing the entire Internet.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          It definitely improves your kung fu. But meditation really only activates super small refinements. You gotta build the kung fu before there’s anything for the meditation to sharpen.

          Basically it increases the resolution of your sensory streams. I mean, that’s the lowest-level effect of all that time spent focusing on the streaming present.