thematic collecting - scanning images of stamps

I am a bit of a general collector, however I have small collection of
reasonably good quality stamps in Japan and George VI areas. I am
attempting to write up my collection thematically and would like to
know if anyone has a recommendation for a portable (small) scanner
which I could use for this purpose. I do have an all-in-one printer
but this appears cumbersome. I have only got back into collecting
recently and I am of the silver surfer variety of collector. Any
suggestions would be appreciated.

Depending on quite what you want to scan, you may find a digital camera does a better job. I never use my scanner any more as the
digital camera gives a better image and is a lot less fuss, especially when photographing a page in an album or stockbook.
Close up images of single stamps can suffer from barrel distortion (the stamps look a bit fat) - if you had a better camera than
mine, it would probably reduce it).

Incidentally, taking digital photos and slapping them on a CD which you then store somewhere safe (your bank, a friend's house,
etc) is a great wayt o document your collection for insurance purposes - super fine digital quality not necessary.

wrote:
I am a bit of a general collector, however I have small collection of
reasonably good quality stamps in Japan and George VI areas. I am
attempting to write up my collection thematically and would like to
know if anyone has a recommendation for a portable (small) scanner
which I could use for this purpose. I do have an all-in-one printer
but this appears cumbersome. I have only got back into collecting
recently and I am of the silver surfer variety of collector. Any
suggestions would be appreciated.

I'm unclear about your purpose, johnbf. When collectors talk about
"writing up" their collections they normally are referring to creating
album or exhibit pages, in which case you wouldn't need a scanner. Are
you thinking of creating a web page or blog?

I suppose that newer digital cameras are capable of creasting useful
images of single stamps, but even the best camera will create the
barrel distortion that John Mycroft mentions, in which parallel lines
(the edges of stamps in this case) bow outward. There is also the
inevitable problem of perspective distortion, caused when the plane of
the subject (the stamp) is not parallel with the film plane, er, CCD.
That's the type of distortion that causes buildings to appear to lean
backward when they are photographed from nearby at ground level.
Both types of distortion can be corrected in Photoshop, but you will
still end up with an image that isn't quite like the stamp and the
process is time-consuming and a pain. If you want to see typical
images of stamps created with digital cameras, browse through the
listing of stamps on eBay. They are generally awful.

I've been using the same inexpensive scanner ($129) for about 10
years. It easily produces astonishingly sharp images of any size you
need. Moreover, you can easily scan two or three dozen stamps at once
if you wish, and then crop the individual stamps out of the resulting
image as needed. There's a bit of a learning curve with any scanner,
but then that's true of anything electronic these days. I have a new
cellphone; after working with it for a couple of hours, I'm almost at
the stage where I can make a call with it! BTW, almost any inexpensive
flatbed scanner will do the job, unless you need to produce
billboards.

Good luck with your project, whatever it is!

Bob Ingraham

wrote:
I am a bit of a general collector, however I have small collection of
reasonably good quality stamps in Japan and George VI areas. I am
attempting to write up my collection thematically and would like to
know if anyone has a recommendation for a portable (small) scanner
which I could use for this purpose. I do have an all-in-one printer
but this appears cumbersome. I have only got back into collecting
recently and I am of the silver surfer variety of collector. Any
suggestions would be appreciated.

I've had pretty good success scanning stamps with my HP all-in-one for
several years now. The all-in-one is right next to my computer and near
my stamp collection; my digital camera is downstairs and in the closet
-- much less effort to use the closer machine. You can also scan
multiple stamps at a time and use cut and paste to separate the stamps.
Graphic software programs will also allow you to straighten your stamp
images so that they aren't skewed.

I have tried taking pictures of my stamps but wasn't happy with the
results. I think some sort of camera stand would be necessary to get
consistent results with a fair number of stamps.

Your mileage may vary.

Bill

wrote in message
...
I am a bit of a general collector, however I have small collection of
reasonably good quality stamps in Japan and George VI areas. I am
attempting to write up my collection thematically and would like to
know if anyone has a recommendation for a portable (small) scanner
which I could use for this purpose. I do have an all-in-one printer
but this appears cumbersome. I have only got back into collecting
recently and I am of the silver surfer variety of collector. Any
suggestions would be appreciated.

Hello. There have been occcasions when I had to take digital pictures of
stamps and other small objects although I still prefer to scan whenever
possible. However, if you insist on taking pictures here are a few things
to keep in mind to cut down on "fixing" the images later on.

(1) Set your camera on 'macro' and do not use the optical zoom - just move
your camera in and out or up and down as the case may be but do not zoom.
If you rather shoot from a longer distance, set your camera on 'portrait'
and use your optical zoom.

(2) Light your object from the sides -- two flashlights facing each other at
the same level as your object. Do not use camera flash since when you
shooting from a short distance, the camera computer cannot fullly compensate
for the flash catching part of the lens or lens-hood.

(3) Never use the digital zoom -- it just makes a mess.

(4) If you wish to set up a jig for shooting "down", a converted drill press
with home-made attachments for the camera does the trick. Plastic
wire/cable belts are good for camera attachments and have never caused me
any damage.

(5) Set your camera on .tif saving mode with no compression. Will give you
better pictures to "play with" later if needs must.

(6) If at all possible, scan, crop and save.

Stuff I learnt through mistakes. Hope it helps.
--
Tony Vella
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

need. Moreover, you can easily scan two or three dozen stamps at once
if you wish, and then crop the individual stamps out of the resulting
image as needed.

I would agree with everything Bob mentions, excepting the above,
most modern budget scanners should include the option to
"carousel" any image or multiples thereof, and scan those carousels

See this scan of two random stamps with the carousel or "marquee"
http://cjoint.com/data/dBaqg2Karp.htm

This is important to keep a standard scan size amongst all your images
(I scan all mine at 500dpi [dots per inch] which results in an image
around 160Kb for a standard machin stamp)

This is also important for your OCR [object character recognition]
when you want to scan portions of printed text on a page of a book or
magazine
and turn it into text document.

The scanner should win hands down v camera, if set up correctly,
adjacent to your monitor.
I can scan, adjust the image to the vertical and crop ready for archive
40 stamps in about 4-5 minutes.

BTW what is a "silver surfer" collector? I looked at "chrome dome"
and assumed you are always on the search for something new to collect?

"Sir F. A. Rien"
I would agree with everything Rodney mentions, excepting the above,
There are no dots in scanning. You ae scanning an object into pixels, thus
ppi is the term.

A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet.
Down in layman's alley, pixels are "dots"

But ... beyond that, 500 PPI is -=not=- any reasonable division of the
scanner's 'native' optical resolution. Thus you are forcing an
interpolation
of the data and losing sharpness!

That maybe so, but at 500dpi my sharpness is archived.
If I need to see a pearl on Her Majesty's earing on a Wilding issue
I simple "click" once, and I can see the goosebumps on her neck.

You are looking at the object from a differing angle,
one I am not interested in, (with respect).

"Sir F. A. Rien"
I would agree with everything Rodney mentions, excepting the above,
There are no dots in scanning. You ae scanning an object into pixels, thus
ppi is the term.

I would agree with nothing that Mr. Rien mentions,

My Epson Scanner chooses to use the collective "Dots per inch"
http://cjoint.com/data/dDcoAfOzMT.htm
From Wiki, it is the express language required to communicate with
the printer in setting the parameters to which the printer shall employ
when reproducing the digital image.

On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:18:21 +0900, "rodney"
wrote:


"Sir F. A. Rien"
I would agree with everything Rodney mentions, excepting the above,
There are no dots in scanning. You ae scanning an object into pixels, thus
ppi is the term.

I would agree with nothing that Mr. Rien mentions,

My Epson Scanner chooses to use the collective "Dots per inch"
http://cjoint.com/data/dDcoAfOzMT.htm
From Wiki, it is the express language required to communicate with
the printer in setting the parameters to which the printer shall employ
when reproducing the digital image.

In all fairness, original issue aside, in New York colleges, many of
them frown on using Wiki as a "true" reference. It is a great jumping
off place... Except for specific items, like the Enigma machine used
in WWII - check that sucker out for a reference. :^)

Check this out:

http://www.opalescencephoto.com/ed_ppi_dpi.aspx

PPI (pixels per inch) is the number of pixels displayed in an image. A
digital image is information that your screen displays in pixels. The
PPI is the display resolution not the image resolution.

DPI (dots per inch) Dots Per Inch, a measure of resolution counting
dots (pixels) running across one inch of the image. It is a measure of
the resolution of a printer. It refers to the dots of ink or toner
used by an ink jet printer, laser printer, or other printing device to
print your text and graphics. In general, the more dots, the better
and sharper the image. DPI is printer resolution.

LPI (lines per inch) also called screen frequency or ruling, is how
many rows of halftone spots make up a halftone screen that is used to
convert a continuous tone image (photograph) into a series of dots.
How fine or coarse the screen is.

SPI (samples per inch) is scanner and digital image resolution. To
scan an image the scanner takes a sampling of portions of the image.
The more samples it takes per inch, the closer the scan is to the
original image. The higher the resolution, the higher the SPI.

*****

In conclusion DPI describes the resolution of printers. PPI describes
the density of pixels in an image file. In simplistic terms – to
produce a print the system (computer, printer, software and settings)
map the PPI of the image file to the DPI of the printer.

In all fairness, original issue aside, in New York colleges, many of
them frown on using Wiki as a "true" reference.

Yes, not the first time I had heard this.

I'll read your links, I take it as Epson scans at "x" dpi, which the
printer would interpolate as a defined print size, thereby having
"dpi" at the correct nomenclature, in other words, a correct
language for what I was quoting in my post.

According to Epson, I scan at a resolution of (x) DPI.