Scanner Recommendations - Page 4

Nack · 10-27-2006, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soviet

Magic fingers.

The Harry Potter approach. Clever

Nota Bene · 10-28-2006, 03:41 PM

Dave,

Slim scanners are terrible at scanning 3D objects, so go for something bigger. HP scanners are good, but I am not too happy with their software. When shopping for a scanner ask them to scan your watch, and see how it turnes out.

Alexei

Christophe · 03-28-2007, 08:07 AM

Is someone in the Forum using this scanner ?

Can this scanner scan 3D objects, such as medals or screwback orders ?

Many thanks in advance.

Cheers.

Ch.

EricFG · 03-28-2007, 08:25 AM

I had an Epson CX3200, so it's not the same model, but it scanned medals *great*. Real nice images. So maybe Epson does this job well, generally.
The new scanner I got, an HP, is strictly 2 dimensional.

I checked Amazon and epinions and no reviews there mention 3-d issues.
Unless someone here has one be preared to buy it, install it, run a test scan or 10, and then return it if it doesn't do what you want.
I'd guess that for $100+/- you're going to get what ya paid for. :/

Greg Collins · 03-28-2007, 08:44 AM

When using ANY scanner, the problem you're going to run into is "depth of field"- there is no way to adjust the aperature of the scanning lens, which scans wide open. The focus is set to the glass of the scanning window. Any part of the object you're scanning that is away from the glass will begin to fall out of focus. The degree of "out of focus" will depend on the depth of the object itself and the lens in the scanner.

I've had pretty good results with flat medals, pins and badges, embroidered patches and the like on scanners- some so thick that I had to remove the door of the scanner and cover with a dark cloth during the scanning process. BUT, when objects got too thick, I had to go the camera route. Best to have both options if possible.

Lapa · 03-28-2007, 10:21 AM

Christophe,

There are basically 2 types of flatbed scanners: CCD scanners, and real optical scanners.

CCD scanners are compact, light, cheap, and do a good job with strictly flat objects.
Optical scanners are usually bigger, heavier, and more expensive, but the output is of higher quality; their specificity is their ability to scan beyond simply the plane of the scanner plate. Now, how much will the depth of field be will vary from model to model, from 1cm up to about 5cms; beyond that, the image becomes blurry.

Marc

jefflgarrison · 03-28-2007, 11:42 AM

That was the question my wife posed as she walked in on me doing the little test of my scanners ability with 3D.

It is a Plustek OpticBook 3600 that sells for about $250. Is fantastic for scanning printed material, btw.

Here is an example of it's capability. I highly recommend it for a variety of things. It is rugged enough for heavy scanning. However, I didn't put it to the test by sitting on it since I way a bit more than I think the plastic case and glass top can handle.

Oh, and btw, this is a great example as to why the "Shroud of Turin" is suspect. Notice the glasses. The ear pieces are not bent out like that. It actually made my face seem thicker than it is.

Lapa · 03-28-2007, 12:33 PM

Jeff,

That's a great shot

Marc

EricFG · 03-28-2007, 12:57 PM

Nice shot Jeff!!!!
His image does display a very excellent "depth of field".
Are there any numbers in the specs of scanners in general that indicate "depth of field"?

Lapa · 03-28-2007, 02:02 PM

Eric,

Some companies have understood that some people can be interested by this feature, but they are few and far between. Mostly, you have to test it in the shop to know for sure.

Marc

03-28-2007, 08:07 AM	#33
Christophe Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Paris - Berlin Age: 61 Posts: 1,208	Scanner Epson V100 : Is it OK for scanning 3D objects ? Is someone in the Forum using this scanner ? Can this scanner scan 3D objects, such as medals or screwback orders ? Many thanks in advance. Cheers. Ch.

03-28-2007, 08:25 AM	#34
EricFG Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Naples, Florida, USA Age: 59 Posts: 1,496	I had an Epson CX3200, so it's not the same model, but it scanned medals great. Real nice images. So maybe Epson does this job well, generally. The new scanner I got, an HP, is strictly 2 dimensional. I checked Amazon and epinions and no reviews there mention 3-d issues. Unless someone here has one be preared to buy it, install it, run a test scan or 10, and then return it if it doesn't do what you want. I'd guess that for $100+/- you're going to get what ya paid for. :/ __________________ "patina imparts character" - PJS A wise man said: 'you should not pay a premium for what you want beyond your comfort level, and always ensure there is a mutually agreeable return policy.'

03-28-2007, 08:44 AM	#35
Greg Collins Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Central Virginia Age: 70 Posts: 744	When using ANY scanner, the problem you're going to run into is "depth of field"- there is no way to adjust the aperature of the scanning lens, which scans wide open. The focus is set to the glass of the scanning window. Any part of the object you're scanning that is away from the glass will begin to fall out of focus. The degree of "out of focus" will depend on the depth of the object itself and the lens in the scanner. I've had pretty good results with flat medals, pins and badges, embroidered patches and the like on scanners- some so thick that I had to remove the door of the scanner and cover with a dark cloth during the scanning process. BUT, when objects got too thick, I had to go the camera route. Best to have both options if possible. __________________ "We are Marching for the Victory of Communist Labour" V.I. Ulyanov (Lenin)

03-28-2007, 12:57 PM	#39
EricFG Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Naples, Florida, USA Age: 59 Posts: 1,496	Nice shot Jeff!!!! His image does display a very excellent "depth of field". Are there any numbers in the specs of scanners in general that indicate "depth of field"? __________________ "patina imparts character" - PJS A wise man said: 'you should not pay a premium for what you want beyond your comfort level, and always ensure there is a mutually agreeable return policy.'

10-28-2006, 03:41 PM	#32
Nota Bene Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: New York USA Posts: 2,296	Dave, Slim scanners are terrible at scanning 3D objects, so go for something bigger. HP scanners are good, but I am not too happy with their software. When shopping for a scanner ask them to scan your watch, and see how it turnes out. Alexei

03-28-2007, 10:21 AM	#36
Lapa Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: St Petersburg, Russia Age: 63 Posts: 2,397	Christophe, There are basically 2 types of flatbed scanners: CCD scanners, and real optical scanners. CCD scanners are compact, light, cheap, and do a good job with strictly flat objects. Optical scanners are usually bigger, heavier, and more expensive, but the output is of higher quality; their specificity is their ability to scan beyond simply the plane of the scanner plate. Now, how much will the depth of field be will vary from model to model, from 1cm up to about 5cms; beyond that, the image becomes blurry. Marc

03-28-2007, 12:33 PM	#38
Lapa Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: St Petersburg, Russia Age: 63 Posts: 2,397	Jeff, That's a great shot Marc

03-28-2007, 02:02 PM	#40
Lapa Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: St Petersburg, Russia Age: 63 Posts: 2,397	Eric, Some companies have understood that some people can be interested by this feature, but they are few and far between. Mostly, you have to test it in the shop to know for sure. Marc

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)