Comparing a Camera image of a "double Profile" Bust half....and a scan. Very large images

stman

I have heard from many members lately say that you "Cannot" get a scan through a slab and it will be blurry and distorted. Now I'm not trying to say a scan is better because most cases it's not. Below the first image Russ shot for me some time ago. You will notice the color of both images (scan and camera) are pretty darn close IMO as well. No folks, you're not seeing double.... this is a good example of a bold double profile.

Russ image.....


My scan ( I did some time ago as well) granted I didn't really get the luster, but I believe you can see the detail. I also can and do prop the slab away from the glass to get the color to come out better, and still get good detail. Just a post for the "whatever it's worth department."

ER

I need new glasses.

Cladiator

If you can get that scanner to show the luster you'll have one hell of a numismatic image capturing tool.

Baley

Very cool coin and impressive scan

Of course Russ images speak for themselves

Love the double profile

stman

<< <i>If you can get that scanner to show the luster you'll have one hell of a numismatic image capturing tool. >>



Agreed, but that wasn't my point. I'm hearing people say that a scanner cannot take an image with a slab and it will be blurry and distorted.
OK, perhaps they're right as Miss Liberty's face is distorted.

RYK

I am frankly shocked that the scan looks as good as it does compared to the gold standard, Russ' photograph. Too bad the coin is not crusty enough--but if you send it to me, I will help you rid yourself of such a clean piece.

ER

<< <i>

<< <i>If you can get that scanner to show the luster you'll have one hell of a numismatic image capturing tool. >>



Agreed, but that wasn't my point. I'm hearing people say that a scanner cannot take an image with a slab and it will be blurry and distorted.
OK, perhaps they're right as Miss Liberty's face is distorted. >>


Not I.

stman

Hey ER, now I was joking about my Bust half being distorted in the face. Heh, and BTW, what you putting that "Thing" in a Bust half post for?

ER

Heh, that "Thing" can only make yours look 100 times better.

rec78

Please tell us how you did it..everytime i try it, it gets blurry---of course maybe i just dont know how to do it properly...Thanks-Bob

stman

rec78, Not sure what kind of help you need. I really don't do anything special. I do put a piece of black velvet over the slab and glass. But that has nothing to do with it being blurry. If you have any kind of a decent scanner, they should come out crisp. Make sure your settings are on photo, and not documents.

Russ

Oh man, looking back, my image sucks. I could do a lot better now.

Russ, NCNE

stman

<< <i>Oh man, looking back, my image sucks. I could do a lot better now.

Russ, NCNE >>



I know you could do better now. Although you do have a few problems with "real" coins. Heh, I scanned that way before you imaged it.
So just think, I could get a much better scan as well.

carl

I don't think the statement can not is quite appropriate. It's just that a camera has a lot more flexibility than a scanner as to the focal point. And don't forget, just like cars, there are good scanners and bad scanners and there are good cameras and bad cameras. Difficult to compare such things unless you have all the statistics of each product and even then you can't be sure.

stman

<< <i>I don't think the statement can not is quite appropriate. It's just that a camera has a lot more flexibility than a scanner as to the focal point. And don't forget, just like cars, there are good scanners and bad scanners and there are good cameras and bad cameras. Difficult to compare such things unless you have all the statistics of each product and even then you can't be sure. >>



Carl, while I agree with your above statement. You happen to be one of the folks lately that has been saying the scanned images will be distorted. After reading yours, and a few others I decided to say otherwise. Here is your quote from a previous thread......


<< <i>I think we did all this scanner stuff many times in the past. Scanners are made for flat scanning, not for depth. Note if you put you face or other body parts on the scanner, the output is distorted. The same with a coin in a slab >>

Cladiator

<< <i>Although you do have a few problems with "real" coins. >>

MikeInFL

Your scan is above average, for a scan. It does lack a bit of critical sharpness (i.e. blurry), however I don't see any distortion in your scan.

Frankly, you've compared an above average scan against one of Russ' poorer photos (probably a while ago?). Give him the coin today, and I'll bet he can do much better job than the scanner.

That's not to say that a scanner doesn't have advantages -- you can produce a good shot of a coin very, quickly. However a good photograph will trump a scan on sharpness and luster....Mike

Hobbyist

That is an awesome scan! Certainly much better than 99% of the scanners out there can manage and better than most digital pictures you see do to the limitations of the picture takers. I think a camera can still capture more life to the coin, though. That is best shown, even in this example, on the reverse of the 2 pictures. Without even knowing, I think I could have figured out which was the scan. But, that scan would certainly be good enough for me to be satisfied with the picture of that coin.