Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

I feel the time has come for me to offload some of my dupes. I've previously performed some test scans on my 4 in 1 unit, but the quality of the scans is just not worth the effort - largely due to the poor quality of the scanning unit as it's designed for photocopies and faxes, not for high res scans, and secondly maybe because of my technique.

One problem I did encounter when testing is where I had the stamps loaded in a hagner for efficiency (scan a whole sheet and then chop in photoshop to get the seperate sets), but I had a combination of chromatic aberrations (I suspect due to the poor quality of the scanner) as well as the occasional rainbow effect similar to that caused by polarisation of stressed glass or plastic (not sure of the source, though it could even be the scanner and plastic in combination, e.g. light hitting the edge of the plastic in the course of scanning and causing refraction).

So it's time to take my regular scanner home, which is a flatbed multi purpose scanner (film, transparencies, documents, etc - an Epson Perfection V700) which I mostly use for film, so I'm yet to do any stamp scans on this scanner.

I'll be retesting some scans on the proper scanner to see if the rainbow effect occurs - if it does, I need to find an alternative. Loading stamps one by one onto the glass and then putting the black cardboard (rear of hagner for example) would be a very innefficient method, especially when you would need to realign in photoshop afterwards. I guess another option is stock cards - as they seem to have a matt finish - or even using stamp mounts.

Also what is the optimal resolution? I can go to 4800dpi from the hardware and 12800dpi from software interpollation, but I suspect even the hardware maximum would be overkill. Would 600dpi be considered sufficient? At least at lower res, it usually means faster scans.

Does anyone have any other tips to share on scanning stamps, and efficiently?

600 dpi should be more than sufficient, unless you're trying to blow up plate flaws or the like. Lots of folks here post quality images from scanners costing less that $100.

I know Glen highly recommends the Cannon LiDE90. I have an LiDE60 that does an adequate job, but I'm considering buying an LiDE100 off ebay for a little over CDN$100. (Anybody familiar with that model?)

I am not sure that the machine would be the problem unless it is of poor quality. I use a HP Photosmart 3310 All-in-One which copes very nicely with all my copying, printing, scanning and very occasional fax needs.

Having said that the scanners mentioned by Mike are used by many members with obvious excellent results. It would probably be fair to say that many of us use a variety of machines, most to good effect.

The image below is of some stamps I intend to show (separately) on the board in the near future. It was scanned on my All-in-One, cropped in Picasa and saved in Photobucket on a setting of 800 by 600. The original resolution on the scanner was used. I have no idea what it is as we have never changed it. We have scanned many hundreds of photos, stamps and covers.



cheers

_________________
Here to learn
Here to enjoy

600dpi is plenty, although I know many board members go to 2400dpi. I use a HP psc1210 all-in-one. The printer has died, but it scans just fine.

This scan is of a tiny portion of a stamp. Cropped at the time of scanning, and done at 600dpi. Scanned, straightened and enhanced in Picasa.

_________________
Always looking for KGV British Commonwealth, mint, used, covers, anything

My all in one is a HP Colour Laserjet 2840 and for photocopies it seems fine, but for scans it has a distinct chromatic aberation. It could be a fault with the colour scan, but either way it's fine for an allrounder, but for a scanner it's quality is average. I've been using it as a network scanner - as it's a network device that all pc's at home use.

Since I already have a large flatbed scanner for film scanning, it makes more sense to use that for scanning purposes.

mgb
Why dont you just stick a stamp a red one would be good, straight onto the glass and do a scan at 600dpi then do the the same stamp with the back of a black hanger sheet, then with it in the hanger and then drop all three pic on here and we can have a look at them and we may be able to throw some extra ideas back at you.

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

OttawaMike, i highly recommend the Lide100, its fantastic!
Cost me a little over $130 aud about 3 months ago off ebay - well worth the money!

Scanning at 600dpi and then using Photoshop to crop and enlarge works a treat with this scanner, or the 60 and 90 as others use those models with no problems at all, getting clear sharp images.

At around $100 or so, you can pick up a great little scanner that does the job. I also have a 4 in 1 but thats now only for printing, faxing etc. I never use it to scan anymore!

_________________
You don't know me well enough to label me sick, or even disturbed. When you break it down I'm just two girls.
Trying to blend, trying to vibe. Trying to live just one life. Everybody's got insanities... I got a split personality.

I'll do a variety of test runs when I get a chance - I don't expect problems with my dedicated scanner, as it has performed flawlessly with a wide variety of film stock. I wasn't sure whether the polarisation effect was just a quirk with my all in one unit, or a common effect when scanning through the plastic on hagners. From comments here, it doesn't sound like a common problem with scanning through hagners, which will make life easier to scan in bulk.

The other main question was that of resolution, as the higher the res, the slower the scan and the larger the file space taken up. If 600dpi sounds perfectly acceptible, then I'll stick to that.

Unfortunately I didn't end up bringing the scanner home tonight as there was a family emergency I had to race off to, so I'll have to pop into the office this weekend and get it.

For resolution, I would say it depends what you want to do with the image.

If I want to use a large image to see some detail, I find I rarely need more than 600 dpi. I will also scan at 600 dpi a few stamps I want to show on SB.

However, if I am going to post a complete hagner, I would scan at 300 dpi. Remember that when it is shown on SB the image will be reduced anyway to fit in the window. At even 300 dpi a hagner is about two 17" screens wide. Try opening one with Irfanview or some other software that does not resize images to fit the window/screen!

Thanks R~C!

Doesn't sticking an image into PhotoBucket at the 15" screen format
negate all the beneficial effects you are spending time to achieve?

I admit I am confused about scanning technique, but my old cheapo
scanner at 300dpi seems to do all right for SB purposes. Like someone
has suggested above, I might do precisely the same image at 300dpi
and 600dpi and post them side by side, and see what you think.

Better you buy my item the same day, then I can send the post and
the image to never-never land, no worries after that...

My scanner is perfectly adequate for the postings I have been making to SB. But it's useless for the detailed images I want to produce to illustrate my re-entry collection. The scans that I have seen of Glen's using the LiDE90 are much more finely discerned than those I can get with my LiDE60.

I bought a USB microscope and it will give me the detail I want, but it's way too clumsy and too narrowly focused.

300dpi


scan dimension on my pc =290 x 347

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

1200dpi

I know which one i would like to see on the board

scan dimension on my pc =1156 x 1382

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

At what point does a higher dpi have no effect because of the pixel restictions for posting here?

2400dpi


scan dimension on my pc =2322 x 2764

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

I asked essentially the same question (above) in a different way:

Doesn't sticking an image into PhotoBucket at the 15" screen format
negate all the beneficial effects you are spending time to achieve?

I see no difference between the 1200 and 2400 dpi images above.

I suspect the "break point" depends on the size of the stamp being scanned.

Gutters, as an experiment, can you give us scans of that same stamp at 600 and 800 dpi?

In a word -

NO!

I'd be delighted if all members on this board bought a Canon lide90 or similar and posted images entirely of this quality below.

At around $A100 worldwide every member should have such a scanner. Takes just minutes to set up, and you can readily scan pages of opened out catalogues etc, due to the clever hinged lid.

Such a scanner, and use of the free Google Picasa edit program, that even tech dummies like me can master in a minute, are what gets consistent results like these:

400dpi

600dpi


don't have 800dpi
and all done on a brother dcp-130 4 in 1

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

now that they have all been posted the 1200 is still a larger stamp on the board place you mouse on the right side and scroll down with the wheel.

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

Glen, answer the question I asked,
not the one tap-dancing inside your head!

Regardless of the brand of the scanner, considering that
PhotoBucket chokes the size down to 800 x 600 (for the 15"
screen, etc.), do you get any better image from scanning
at (say) 2400dpi than you do from 1200dpi????

And a further complicating factor to that question, keep in
mind that "most" monitors display a maximum of 72 pixels
per inch. No wonder no one can figure this out!

Thanks for that , Gutters. I see that the 1200 is larger than the 800, but the same as the 2400. So it seems that the "break point" where higher resolution makes no difference for that size of stamp must be somewhere between 800 and 1200.

I can do 1200 dpi scans - it's the max for my LiDE60 - but it takes FOREVER! A function of my computer's capacity, I should think. Or is it the scanner?

Don't know mike maybe pc had an lide90 a while back it was quick enough
At the moment this thing can pump out a scan every 60 seconds or so
i can stick a full sheet on the bed and scan at 1200 and just move the prescan square on to the next stamp without resizing it and scan again and again, that's the part that takes up my time

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

Mike ... the ones above were done as "Business Card" size (on "Page Size" dropdown and "color" as the opton .. be careful lthere are many choices) on my lide70 at 1200 dpi. They take 20 seconds to scan.

THAT is the key .. scan a stockcard at full page setting, and it may well take minutes.

That scanner has no 2400 setting, so clearly good scans are not dependent on that. (Despite Doug's mantra!)

Again, that's not the question I asked. The 2400dpi could
be any other large scan number.

My question is, and Mike has a useful terminology, what is
the break point, where a higher scan number does no good?

By the way, the editing functions in PhotoBucket itself are
very very good, including special effects Picasa doesn't have
(not that we want special effects on our stamp scans ).

Glen - You mean there's a way to scan less than the full page? Takes over 5 minutes for me to do a 1200 dpi scan. If I've been missing a shortcut, I may have to just shoot myself.

Mike in Canada it is your Constitutional right to shoot yourself.

In the USA it is your constitutional right to shoot anyone you choose, any time you choose, for any reason you choose, as long as you have $200 to go into WalMart and buy a weapon, as far as I can work out their cute rules.

Assuming you have the standard Canon-Scan software loaded, that section that is 4 down "PAPER SIZE" drop down is the keyto good scans.

NEVER use it for the default full page if scanning just a black stock card.

I use "Business Card Size" drop down most times. 20 seconds or so to get this:

Or just prescan and crop around the area you want scan

_________________
I AM ALWAYS IN THE MIDDLE
Post your KGV faults on the stampboard wiki.

Most scanners, including my cheapo OneTouch 7300, will
let you specify the area to scan, so many inches across,
and so many inches high, counting from the "baseline"
corner.

On my machine, for a 4x6 stockcard, I would probably select
5" high and 7" wide, and that's all it does. That's 35 square
inches compared to roughly 94 square inches for an entire
page, so the file is 35/94 (37%) as big, and the time spent
is something less than half of what an entire page requires.

You would, of course, put the stockcard down at the baseline
corner, not in the center of the scanner glass.

Here is a scan of one stamp, so it was placed clear down in
the corner of the glass, and took only seconds to scan;
I normally use a red-brown background sheet.

Jeez, I've been scanning full pages and cropping. I'll have to check into this when I have some time.

Went to look into the recommended scanner and find that it is no longer current; There is an LiDE 100 which appears to replace it.

In that case, a website like http://www.overstock.com might have
great deals on that discontinued model; they now ship to
Canada, the UK, and Europe, but not Australia (yet).

Or what about eBay-Australia? There is at least one Canon
LiDE 100 scanner, #290286798303, buy-it-now for AU $125
postpaid; I do not know if that is a good deal or not, but I
just looked at the listing.

Not for us hicks down here it is not discontinued .. I bought one recently from here:

http://www.shopbot.com.au/pp-canon-lide ... 84074.html

I have a Canon Lide 200. Here are three scans at 1200, 2400 and 4800 dpi respectively, all resized to 800x600.





I can't see any appreciable difference between them.

LiDE200? Is that a different type than the 60, 90, 100 series? What was the cost?

Go to the ebay listing cited above, scroll down quite a
ways, and you will see links to all the Canon scanners,
model by model. But that's Australia, perhaps not what's
available in Canada or the U.S.

It was AUD140-something.

As far as I can tell the lide90 and the lide200 are the same thing, jut a new model sequence, as they now go

100, 200, 400, 600 etc. .

I bought an extra lide90 for a friend just before Xmas who has not paid for it yet as he lost his job, so if anyone wants that it is the $A125 I paid - still fully sealed in factory box as I got it.

(Oz based buyer only please due to weight and power supply and power plug issues etc.)

Thanks for that scanning info, Glen. With just a little experimenting, I figured out that "business card" thing, and did this scan at 1200 dpi for another thread:

Mike .. .yes that means you get a MUCH sharper and higher rez image - that one looks great!

Be sure to place stamp in lower left corner of the platen though!

I also use the '4" x 6" postcard' option of lot too for covers etc.

That £100 revenue appears to be Barefoot & Hall #31B/C/D/E,
catalog value £75 to £100 twenty years ago, probably a premium
for an extra nice copy and cancellation. The letters refer to
perforation varieties. It is the high value of a long set called
the Sands & McDougall issue.

The LiDE90 has a maximum resolution of 2400x4800, while the LiDE200 has a maximum of 4800x4800, so while it may fit into the product range at the same point it is not the same.

Actually, Doug, that's a Gibbons-listed postal fiscal with a Melbourne CTO postal cancel.

Yes, #282 or #285 or #288 or #291 (I'm not good on the
British interpretation of shades), but, my citation is also
correct, and B&H lists many more varieties than Gibbons.

Not 100% sure that's correct - maybe. Barefoot list revenue usages, not postal. But the illustration in Barefoot is of a CTO version like this one. I believe that some of these only exist CTO, though, so it's unclear to me exactly what Barefoot is listing.

As the Vic hi-vals were postal AND fiscal useages both Barefoot AND SG list them.

Our member Les Molnar of course has a very good overview of the many types:

http://www.stampsofvictoria.com/duties.php

Where he also says:

Details on the printings of these very high denominations will be added in the very near future.....

So let's hold him to account!

Glen

But primarily, B&H lists revenue stamps, not usages.

Otherwise, all the thousands of Commonwealth issues inscribed
Postage - Revenue would be lumped in there too.

Granted there are exceptions made for stamps like Bermuda KGV
and KGVI, to name just one example.

This is my final post on the subject, and we are off-topic anyway,
my fault for introducing the ID of the £100 stamp pictured.

Not exactly, Glen.

They often list the same stamp, where it was valid for both fiscal and postal use. But Gibbons prices stamps as mint and postally used and Barefoot only as fiscally used. But the confusion in this case, at least to me, arises because some versions of these stamps only exist CTO. Gibbons specifically lists the CTO price. Barefoot makes no mention of CTO as far as I can see.

Anyway, I would never reference Barefoot for a postally used stamp, or with a postal CTO, when that stamp was listed in a standard postage stamp catalogue like Gibbons.

Ok, some early feedback on my Epson V700...

It appears the polarisation effect I came across on my all in one unit (HP 2840) was actually the stocksheet, as I was able to recreate the problem on my Epson V700. I believe the problem stocksheet was a Kanga sheet. Here's an example:

The default exposure settings on the scanner is a little too bright, so I toned this down by -20 when scanning.

Kanga stocksheet (Scan settings: 24 Bit colour (at) 600dpi, -20 brightness, Unsharp mask) Most noticable in the white margins along the top near right margin, and then on the right margin near the bottom.


When I tried with a prinz stocksheet, I didn't see this effect at all, so I'll stick to the prinz stocksheets for my scanning.

I've also done some tests on resolution:

Prinz stocksheet (Scan settings: 24 Bit colour (at) 300 dpi, -20 brightness, Unsharp mask, Local dimensions 295x355, Photobucket dimensions 295x355)


Prinz stocksheet (Scan settings: 24 Bit colour (at) 600 dpi, -20 brightness, Unsharp mask, Local dimensions 590x711, Photobucket dimensions 590x711)


Prinz stocksheet (Scan settings: 24 Bit colour (at) 1200 dpi, -20 brightness, Unsharp mask, Local dimensions 1181x1423, Photobucket dimensions 664x800)


Prinz stocksheet (Scan settings: 24 Bit colour (at) 2400 dpi, -20 brightness, Unsharp mask, Local dimensions 2362x2846, Photobucket dimensions 664x800)


I tested 24 and 48 bit colour, and there was no noticable difference.

There's no point scanning at 2400dpi, as the resampling when uploading to photobucket means they end up the same size. Even 1200 dpi has little net gain over 600 dpi.