Scanning stamp images
Is there any advice out there on a good way to scan the back of the stamps? I have scanned stamps that I know have hinge marks on them, but they don't really show up in the scan. Should I be happy the marks are light, make a note in the description and move on, or is there a trick?
Many of my scans on Hipstamp have a reflection from the stock sheet I used, almost always along the bottom of the row. Any tips for this issue or did I use a cheap shock sheet? If it is a cheap stock sheet, any recommendations on the best brand for this issue?
Many of my scans on Hipstamp have a reflection from the stock sheet I used, almost always along the bottom of the row. Any tips for this issue or did I use a cheap shock sheet? If it is a cheap stock sheet, any recommendations on the best brand for this issue?
Comments
I use IrfanView to scan and edit my photos. It's free and works great. I find that if I am having difficulty viewing something on my stamps or covers, such as a postmark, I use the "Negative" image option and it sometimes makes the postmark stand out better. See images for an example...
As far as getting a glare, I don't get that when I scan so I don't have any suggestions on how to fix that.
Bob
The Hagner style stock sheets have strips that are covered with a flap sealed to the page only along the bottom edge. When placing stamps on the pages you pull the flap away from the page (which is made of card stock) and insert the stamp. The flap springs back and holds the stamps securely. I use only this type for scanning, as I do not get any glare from the sealed edge
Even aside from scanning, I prefer the Hagner style sheets because the pockets and the pages as a whole just lie flatter and create less glare during normal viewing. The Varios, being of all plastic construction, never appear perfectly flat. There is always a certain amount of waviness to them that creates annoying glare and reflections.
No, negative image doesn't help to show difficult watermarks. There are other techniques for this, but even they can result in not illustrating the watermark. This is especially true on US single lines on issues with light colored inks (Yellow, orange). The best method I have found for this is either a) good old fluid (Ronsonol) or use of the Signoscope (which would also solve the issues that Don mentions). It illustrates these variations quite well.
That said, the device is frequently criticized as it can be tricky to learn to use, and for many things that it is good at illustrating, there are other ways to achieve it. For me, the only really consistent usage is for faint watermarks that are difficult to see on light colored US issues. I have a posting in the Franklin-Washington regarding watermarks here
https://www.hipstamp.com/forums/discussion/4251/franklin-washington-taming-the-beast-part-3-watermarks-and-detection#latest
which shows an example in fluid (which is unnoticeable, even after manipulation in Photoshop to turn on or off certain color channels), and the Signoscope image above it where the double line watermark is clear.
Don, I think your concern about hinge marks, and regular photos/scans is fine. If you're describing it accurately, and you have a good quality back scan (600dpi+ or 20Mega Pixel+ for cameras) that is in focus, then it's good enough. Have a look at some of our OG HR/HM listings, and you'll see what I mean. We've recently changed our imaging process (we've done that 4 or 5 times over the years), to a 4K overhead camera that is really quite good. So our old listings may have scanner artifacts in them, but our current stuff is more reflective of the true color of the stamp, and without glare or scanner interference.
I've been using Ronsonol for years and I do have a Signoscope. Just curious if the negative would work.
What is interesting is, I just ran that exact image through Retro Reveal, and ONE of the channels (BLUE under RGB) does give a visible image. So if you're really interested in seeing it (this was still an image in fluid that was then processed by RetroReveal), the watermark is visible. I will try this with the dry version as well, and see if that is effective. I have not been successful in getting that watermark to be visible in Photoshop.
Here is the RR image.
It was extracted from this image:
Meant to add this.
This is the "invert" of the image in fluid. You can see, it does not enable the visibility of the double-line watermark.
The DPI's are limited. We recently switched to this camera:
Which is much much faster than scanning, has better image quality, and reflects color more accurately than scanners do (as they are influenced by the background).
It's not terribly expensive either. Search Amazon for IPEVO V4K Ultra High Definition.
All our listings in the past 2 months have been made with this camera. (So check any of our listings since 10 September and they were made using this camera).
I have 4 monitors plus 2 TVs (used as TV's) if I inspect a scan on all of them I get 6 different looking scans. That is because there is no such thing as a "color corrected" monitor - nor can there be. The most frustrating thing I had to do when I was in the working masses was place a press proof that I though was perfect in front of an account manager and hear them say "add a little more yellow over here". Color, I guess, is in the eye of the beholder (or paying customer).
The best bet is to scan at 400-600 dpi and depend on the quality of your scanner to render an acceptable image. Just about any stand alone flatbed that will scan in those parameters works well.
I have scanned tens of thousands of images using this scanner with no problems.
The scanner itself is an old Epson model that I have had for probably twenty years. It also has color inkjet printer and fax capabilities, but I haven't used those two functions in over ten years. I found that for printing a cheap laser printer with just a high capacity black cartridge is much less expensive over the long run - those inkjet cartridges are expensive and don't last that long.
"It's not terribly expensive either. Search Amazon for IPEVO V4K Ultra High Definition"
Bought one and it was delivered yesterday. Interesting tool and it will save a lot of time with covers and postcards..What resolution are you scanning at? Do you use Snapshot? Any hints on settings - I do notice changes in ambient lighting necessitate changes in settings (at least using Snapshot).
Available tutorials help.
Thanks
Carol/webpaper
I scan (photo) at maximum resolution, and then just trim off edges with photoshop, which only takes a moment. Scanning takes a lot longer, this is "click" and it works. There is an on screen focus button too for autofocus that works really well, so you don't have to touch the camera, and risk moving your shot. It does some adjusting to ambient light. I find using minimal light is best, or indirect natural light. Try to keep the shadow off. I have an ott light that I use for side lighting and it works really well. We found that it basically double the speed at which we could do front and back imaging with trimming, and with GREAT resolution, and color. One thing to be aware of, if you have something that creates a color tint in the room, you might need to rethink it. (i.e. pink curtains where the sun light creates a pink hue when shinning directly on them).
Hope you guys find it as useful as we have! We've been doing this a long time and have used everything from DSLR to 1200DPI scanners over the last 20ish years, and this one is the best thus far. Position the camera head around 4 inches above the subject and shoot. That's how we do it. If it's a big item, then stand it up a lot taller. The camera head also swivels 90 degrees so for wide or long shots, you can pivot it.
If you really like Snapsot (I haven't used it), I'm sure it will work with this camera too.
I have dual USB microscope set up as well as this camera and a web camera, all of which are recognized by Visualizer. So it's easy to swap around. Just have to change the resolution every time... my only "compliant".
Great tool, thanks for sharing
I'm glad it's working out for you Carol! Too bad I can't see your store.
We even use UV to examine stamps for suspicious alterations (not to mention tagging), and even this longer time exposure (versus a scanner) doesn't hurt the stamp if it's done for a few seconds even 100 times in the life of the stamp. So, it's as safe as leaving them in the albums...
For the covers and postcards why not get an automatic feed duplex scanner. (They will scan BOTH fronts and backs at the same time.) Even the lower end scanners will scan at up to 600 dpi. and you can get over 200 done in an hour.
It's still faster than using a flat bed. Not everyone has an ideal situation where a camera, depending on the room and computer set up will work as well with it.
Now as far as some of your pictures can you tell me if these were scanned after Sept 10th?
https://www.hipstamp.com/listing/scott-rs196c-1c-blue-pink-paper-d-ransom-son-co/42171727
https://www.hipstamp.com/listing/scott-rs184d-2c-black-wmk-191r-dr-c-c-moore/42153767
https://www.hipstamp.com/listing/scott-rs39a-1c-black-old-paper-john-i-brown-son/42215858
https://www.hipstamp.com/listing/scott-ro180b-1c-black-silk-paper-u-s-m-co/42215885
Thanks