I'm bringing this up because I've had the same question myself and have had a few people ask me how to do it.

There are some snapshot scanners on the marked. One claims 5mp images, easy operation, and hints that you simply slide the photo into the scanner in a tray, and push the button. (often sells for $99) Well it's not a stacking scanner and reviews for these are marginal at best. It only does one photo at a time, which isn't the idea.

Next in line is the new Kodak scanner that you can scan batches of photos by sitting them in the top feeder much like a fax. Problem is, best price is about $799, (professional sales only but individuals have purchased them) and it's not that good. Because the media is moving along across the scanner sensor, and old photos have dust and loose particle, it tends to get streaks. Anyone who has had any scanner that feeds the prints through a roller system, knows the effect. Real simple, you don't want this one either.

There are some professional scanners that have a feed tray, they cost more than the last few cars I've owned, and they work very well. Home or office snapshot scanners become prohibitive when they cost over $20,000.

Next are some service that have a box deal. All the photos you can fit into a prepaid box, for $49. This comes out to about 39c a scan and they do very good professional work. However some people would prefer not to send their irreplaceable photo collection through the mail and back again. The idea is do this at home and retain control of family photos.

OK? This means so far, home scanners that could stack photos and scan them in a batch, have three strikes against them (quality, price, availability) and sending them out, or driving them to a local shop becomes pretty expensive. Hundreds of dollars to save your old photos and have them on CD or DVD.

What's the answer? Good old flatbed that comes with software which will identify, crop, align, color correct, remove noise and save your photos.

I decided on the Epson V200 which has a 4800 dpi native resolution. That's optical, not some interpolated hype. The software comes with it. I found that I don't like the noise reduction very much, but for $89 (found mine at Office Max) it's super.

You can do four 4x6 photos at a time. A larger bed would possibly hold more, and when you get done, you have a very large scanner sitting on your desk. Small size on the Epson is nice, I could even carry it in a laptop bag. That's why I got it in the first place, for travel, and then I found I liked it better than my desktop scanners.

Did I mention, it does slides and negatives too?

This isn't an ad for Epson scanners. I have an older HP SCSI that I really liked. It's getting dim and streaks, but in it's day, it was my favorite and always on the desk. Have a Brother that's a flatbed on a fax. Pretty good and it is a copier as well. Acer sitting on the home computer, which also has back lighting for slides and film. I used this one to scan old 2 1/4 slides from the family collection.

But when someone asks you about a stacking scanner, so they can just drop their old photos into it and push a button, and get their old snapshots onto a CD and backed up... there's isn't one!

If there was, that issue of feeding photos across the sensor rears it's ugly head. (want examples? I had an old desktop photo scanner that worked this way)

Other than sending photos out and having them done professionally, which will get the best results, and is expensive, getting a flatbed and running photos in batches is the eventual solution.

People don't want to hear this and insist that there should be something for consumers that will do this. There isn't, and now you know why not.

__________________

Epsons are probably the best consumer flatbed scanners on the market. I own a 4490 and a 3200. I use them almost exclusively as film scanners. I scan medium and large format film at 2400 DPI, 35mm at 4800 DPI, process, downsize, sharpen and get decent results.

Next best thing is a drum scanner.

It is very important not to use the anti scratch-dust ICE infrared function, as it gives artifacts when seen at 100%.

Of course by having glass between CCD and film you decrease resolution and sharpness and we all know compromise is the key. Perfection does not exist.

Processing multiple photos at a time is a recipe for bad results. Better do it slowly and only once in your lifetime, than having to do it again afterwards, I say.