Is anyone using either of these processes? If so, can you tell me the pros and cons that you've come across for using either or both?

We are using branch capture, at the end of the day, each teller runs there checks thru the scanner.

We just started, so I will have to keep you posted.

We are going to branch capture later this month where we will be using the back counter process, letting our current proof operator run all transactions. I can keep you posted if you want.

We use back counter and prefer it. The Teller capture requires the teller to image each item before proceeding with the next transaction. One of our competitor uses this method and we have had their customers come over to us because of the wait time to process the transactions. One Retail Store had over 100 checks and they had to wait for each item to image before their transaction could be processed.

We just started teller capture and it is a horrifically slow process. I cannot see the benefit; very inconvenient to customers. Anyone else?

bump. anyone have a solution to the slow time?

Deja vu all over again. There used to be a clear line between thrift (savings) institutions and commercial banks. Commercial banks proofed deposits in a back-office proof department, and tellers verified only the cash in a deposit (and flipped through checks to see that they appeared to be endorsed). Savings institutions proofed deposits at the teller window, and even processed on-us checks through to the drawer's account while the payee waited. Thrift deposits tended to have few checks, and the window proof was not a major hassle; window proofing in a commercial bank would have been a disaster.

The lines got fuzzy as commercial banks wooed consumers and thrifts took on commercial accounts.

Often the result was a blend of teller proofing for low-item-count deposits and back office proofing for higher-item-count deposits.

Would that "blend" concept work for item capture?

Branch capture (back counter) means that you still have to have a full-blown proof department to balance transactions and post the debits/credits. For outsourced banks, your correction expenses do not decrease at all. It is a good process, but the only expense you downsize is courier runs. Even that isn't saved if you then retain the paper items centrally for a certain amount of time.

Teller capture systems have come a long way over the last few years. Most decent systems have a "suspend transaction" button for commercial customers or others with large amounts of checks in their deposit. When presented with a large deposit, you click the button and you just enter in dollar amounts listed on the deposit slip (as you would in a branch capture or traditional environment). When the doors close or you have down time you image all the items. Before the trasnaction is finished, it must be in balance for it to be submitted to the central system for posting and addition to the cash letter. It works very well and you save money on proof department man hours, plus the paper cash in/out and deposit tickets are electronic so you have reduced MICR encoded paper expense.

John's suggestion has also worked successfully. Commercial tellers are set up with a branch capture environment and consumer tellers in a teller capture. You'll get a blend of the cost savings but maintain your transaction speed. However, I prefer having one or the other... trying to train and maintain multiple systems is a pain.