I posted this because I have the opportunity to get one of these scanners for... free.
It's a new model, but I think not so high range... I have already one at home that does all : fax machine /copier/ mails / toaster / panini / wafels...
I think I will pass and get something else, and choose a really good other one for scanning medals.
Which scanner is the best one for scanning medals in your opinion ?
Chris, if it's free, get it. You can always give it to someone if it doesn't work out and you have spent nothing.
Reminds me of a situation several years ago at the local Video rental store. The family in front of me was the winner of a brand new DVD player. Mind you, this was 2000 and not many people had DVD players still in Poland.
I about lost it when they ask the sales cleark, "Do we have to take it? Really?" The sales clerk was shocked but said, "It's free." To which the lady replied, "If we must!"
Anyone has found a clever way to scan a reverse of a screwback award?
I remember there's a mineral named Ulexite that has a result similar to what it is needed... anyone knows a glass/fiber that performs better (for sure must be)? http://www.4physics.com/catalog/images/ulexite.jpg
Some scanners, for example some Epsons do have a depth of field that will allow them to scan screwbacks.
"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.'
01-27-2010, 09:59 PM (This post was last modified: 01-27-2010, 10:25 PM by medals73.)
I find that 99% of scans, no matter how bad, are superior to photographs. Most people simply don't have the equipment, the time and dedication, or the professional photographic skills to get detailed in-focus digital pictures. (Old fashioned film photos are better, and while I sometimes have fantasies about my old SLR, I have no real wish to go back to all that nuisance, especially with the attendant cost and ultimate uselessness of a photograph. I'd just have to scan the photograph anyway!)
The first thing to do is to get a top-drawer scanner that has some hope of dealing with modestly three-dimensional items. Most of the cheaper scanners and all of the scanner combinations (with anything, fax machines, can openers, electric razors) won't work, they simply don't have the depth of field. I use an Epson 1660, and while it is no longer cutting-edge, I am happy enough with it (and I would not ever look at anything non-Epson if I were to replace it).
Obviously, the longer the screw-post, the more trouble you are goling to have. What I do is to take the pair of scissors that usually lies entombed somewhere on my messy desk, grasp the screw post between the scissor blades, arrange the award more or less banancing on the scanner's glass, hold it as stable as I can and lower the scanner top so as to stabilize the award, and then c.a.r.e.f.u.l.l.y let go the screw post with the scissors, withdraw them, pray to whatever gods you worship this week, and scan away. It may take several tries to get something decent, but there is no developing change for subsequent exposures.
You may need to fiddle with scanner settings and adjust your image in PhotoShop (or whatever), but you usually get a first-pass scan that will "do". I usually scan at 300 dpi, which is too much for the web (where 150 dpi is fine), but I like to have these available for potential print publication as well. And it won't break the size limitations on most fora.
And be aware that scanning the obverse presents problems too, as I now have poked depressions in the soft interior of my scanner lid from those screwposts, some of which are (understandably) sharpened for ease in poking through the uniform (though what they did to your chest?!). This damage shows up in some of my scans. Better than watermarking to establish ownership? Need to replace the scanner lid (or the scanner) "some day".
Here is an example of a problem child with long screwpost. This is just a "quickie" scan. With effort, it could get a bit better.
EricFG Wrote:Some scanners, for example some Epsons do have a depth of field that will allow them to scan screwbacks.
Argh, i think mine has no depth of field. I have a EPSON-3490-PHOTO.
medals73 Wrote:I find that 99% of scans, no matter how bad, are superior to photographs. [...]
I use an Epson 1660, and while it is no longer cutting-edge, I am happy enough with it (and I would not ever look at anything non-Epson if I were to replace it).
Double argh, i actually tried to scan reverse of a red star with my 3490 and the result is very very blurry. So, any suggestion? Change scanner?:thumbsdown Buy a macro for my Nikon?:confused:
to have one here on my desk. The curvature does present problems, but with my trusty Epson 1660-Photo ...
