I got the FF-680W and returned it.
I was trying to do the same thing. Massive amount of photos of our own taking up lots of space. Then we've done two house clearances, and another big one to do. So even more photos. Just cant keep hoarding them. I need the space back and I want to be able to access the old photos easily on a digital storage.
In short this scanner worked great for the first 200 or so then started scratching photos especially the glossy ones. From what I've read this is matter of luck some units do this, and some don't. One guy bought two and both did it. But then many people give it great reviews so I maybe I was just unlucky. It scans after it has scratched them so you get light bloom off the scratch that results in a unusable scan. Some say its if the photos have any glue or tape on the back, or dirt thats what causes it. But even after painstaking cleaning it still did it and I couldn't find which roller was doing it. Some say you have to clean it after 100 photos or so, which for me defeats the objective. When it work the automatic restoration, colour fix and dust removal worked great. I think the scans looked better than the original photos. But once mine started scratching things, I had to return it.
I looked at loads of alternatives, using a DSLR, a flatbed, negative scanner, but it was all going to cost a fortune, take forever, and take up a ton of space. None of which appealed to me. I also realised that few places make scanners these days, and many of the used ones, have driver issues. I'm trying to downsize my tech hoarding, not increase it.
Currently trying a Plustek Photo Scanner - ephoto Z300. I would say the quality isn't as good as the FF-680W, but I've done about 200 with mostly no issues. Its not as fast as the FF-680W but its a lot faster than a flatbed. I do get the occasional miss-scan if I try to rush it. I do have an all in one Lazer with a half decent scanner and that is better than the Z300. SO I might do the most important larger photos on that. Is the quality of the Z300 good enough? For me I think it is. Most of these photos are 6x4 or 7x5 with cheap point and shoot cameras, not the greatest quality to begin with.
Another realisation is as Donnie said is being selective about what you scan. I'm not going to scan them all. I'm going to sort out only the best photos, most memorable and only scan them. I'll probably reduce it by 50~70% by that alone. Also especially with elderly parents photos there lots of photos who I have no idea who is in them, and there is no one left to tell me. Also I'm not saving the photos for my own kids. They mostly aren't interested. So its only the photos I (or the other half) want to keep that will be scanned. I'm not keeping the negs either.
I also realised I need to do this selecting only the best photos before I start scanning. Have them ready. As trying to do while your scanning slows you down massively.
