Barnhardt.biz is a good site to visit in order to check out how the latest forgery was done.
Since I do not have the necessary software, I cannot comment on whether or not these folks are being accurate, however, I have done scanning of simple things (yes and made a real hash of the job!!). Somewhere in my books etc. I have documents sent to me from the Victorian registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages relating to members of my family – their births and deaths, and some marriages. These records were kept in bound volumes.
Now some might dispute the point that I am going to make, and without being able to find and scan one of those documents, I cannot prove what I am saying, however, what I noticed, and why I concluded almost immediately that this new document was a fake, comes down to the top corner where it is supposed to look like a scanned image from a bound volume.
If you look closely at the top corner you will see a black hole, then along the edge there is an image of what looks like a document that is next to this one. Now here is the problem that I have with accepting that this is an image that has come from a bound volume:
If the volume is a thick book it is hard to get a good digital or photocopied image. What you do get when it is scanned is a lot of black. If you do not have the book lined up correctly you get a lot of black (trust me, I know!!!). If the book does not lie down flat you will often find that a portion of what you were wanting to copy does not get copied!!!
Here is an experiment where I have used my scanner to copy a page from a knitting book:
I scanned my image the wrong way, the first time, and then I scanned it the other way. At the top you can clearly see that my page is from a bound volume. Now have another look at the latest B.C. image at the top corner, and look how it seems to be almost like a hole has been cut and this item inserted to make it look like it has come from a bound volume. I could be wrong with what I am saying so please chime in.