pwcc

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Yes, I know. I have both scanner types. My slabbed cards still require adjustments - yes, scans are crisp and clear using CCD for slabs, but contrast and color are sometimes off. If anyone who has bought a slabbed card from me thinks my scans look freaky, just say so and I'll rethink things.

The scanner technology doesn't matter as much for color/contrast as it does for focus. CCD is indeed better for items with any sort of depth.

But the software usually makes it's own adjustments. Mine is actually CCD and old. But the new software makes it's own adjustments. I can actually see the adjustment being made. I do a preview scan, then select the area and once the area is selected that area changes compared to the rest of the background. Since I scan with the lid open to get a black background it darkens the entire scanned area so the background is truly black.

The old version of the software would not make that adjustment, so if for instance the lamp beside the scanner was on the background would scan as blackish changing to a dark red in the area closer to the lamp.
As an interesting tech note, the range of the CCD sensor Epson used is somewhat more than 2 feet! One scan with the lamp on had the lamp itself recognizable in the background.

I believe my scanner is adjusting the white balance as it goes, but that's going off recalling my familys first video camera needing the white balance set before each use. If it wasn't done the colors were usually way off.

So I know Epson autoadjusts, and from what I'm reading Cannon probably does as well. Other brands might not, or might do it in a way that's less accurate.

We should also recall that monitors don't display color the same either. And that the flat screen ones are dependent on the viewing angle. On mine viewing from an angle below the monitor (Like reclining a bit in an office chair with the monitor at a slight upward angle) results in black appearing blue.

The scans Peter shows do appear to be a bit oversaturated for color, but as someone else showed the colors used for the cards also varied.

Steve B

[D. Bergin]

I have an Epson V700, which cost a lot of dough IMO and is CCD based.

I constantly have to adjust in Professional mode to try and make items look as close to realistic as possible, depending on what is being scanned.

I'm not talking brightness and contrast and such........I'm not touching those features unless it's something that legitimately needs to be touched up for non-auction/selling reasons.

I'm talking the Sharpness and Descreen features, and the levels those features are set at. A newspaper is scanned differently from a magazine which is scanned differently from a lithograph which is scanned differently from a real photo.

Sometimes on older photos with off-white borders or backs you have to disable the automatic brightness that gets implemented on the initial pre-scan because it makes it too bright and exaggerated, sometimes it comes out closer to reality and you keep it.

On many printed style baseball cards, postcards or magazines, you have to implement the descreen into magazine setting in order to keep the cross-hatch or dot patterns from over-whelming the scan, and then you have to implement the sharpness setting at the same time, in order to keep the descreen setting from dulling down the card/item too much.

A few other things, you should always be scanning in photo mode and not document mode. You should also be disabling such features as dust removal and color adjustment at all times, unless it's something not related to re-selling something.

I'm sure a lot of these large ebay consignment auction houses have several different people scanning with several different scanners, using several types of settings, and this is a reason for several of the differences you see.

Maybe I'm rambling but I hope this makes some sort of sense to somebody. Maybe I'm just worrying too much about it.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Other than the scanner technology (CCD vs CIS), there are some other things to consider too such as the light source. Your Epson uses a CFL (cathode flourescent lamp) light source and, from what I understand, most of the Cannons are using an LED light source which is supposed to be a lot better.

[cyseymour]

I was looking at the Epson 700, and it has a feature called DIGITAL ICE. It is advertised as "DIGITAL ICE - remove the appearance of tears and creases from damaged photos"

http://www.amazon.com/Epson-B11B1780...rds=epson+v700

We've had a lot of people on this board complain of auction house scans where you can't see the creases on the card. Does anyone think that those auction houses might be applying this DIGITAL ICE technology to their scans?

[Sean1125]

Here's a little secret:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Epson-Perfec...item20d0cc1d12

$60 CCD scanner

Takes scans like this with 0 editing what so ever:

[ullmandds]

that's what I've got...a v33...its great value!

[vintagetoppsguy]

Very nice, Sean.

CCD technology with a LED light source for $60. What a deal!

[peterose4hof]

It's compact and lightweight for easy travel too. I can't be the only one who takes a scanner to big shows like the National, right?

[Paul S]

Todd (nolemmings) nicely demonstrated the V33 on this recent thread:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=177630

I'm on my way to pick up this weekend a used one (3 times). Epson doesn't manufacture it anymore.

One thing about it in reviews, is that some people complain about the software loading improperly with newer Windows OSs. Driver problems even when a newer driver fix is available. Fortunately, I get to bring my laptop over and test it out.

[sb1]

This is the same exact scanner I use for B & L and have never tweaked a thing, straight out of the box to the internet.

Originally Posted by Sean1125

Here's a little secret:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Epson-Perfec...item20d0cc1d12

$60 CCD scanner

Takes scans like this with 0 editing what so ever:

[Runscott]

Scott, that's the same exact scanner I own, and I can very easily achieve the same quality images that you show, but I have to modify the contrast. I've never been able to figure out how to get my changes to become the default.

Thanks for posting that.

[Pythonfactory]

Originally Posted by Sean1125

Here's a little secret:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Epson-Perfec...item20d0cc1d12

$60 CCD scanner

Takes scans like this with 0 editing what so ever:

Thanks for sharing. I took the plunge and it arrived today. Couldn't be happier for the price. Here is its first scan. And no, I didn't enhance the scan; it really is that beat up.

[ncinin]

My scanner crapped out and the all in one scanner/printer I purchased produces blurry scans of slabbed cards.

Does anyone have an Epson Perfection V37 scanner? There are refurbished V33 scanners as noted in posts above but I can buy a V37 locally. Does anyone know if the V37 will scan slabbed cards ok or will the newer model's scans be blurry?

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

I was looking at the Epson 700, and it has a feature called DIGITAL ICE. It is advertised as "DIGITAL ICE - remove the appearance of tears and creases from damaged photos"

http://www.amazon.com/Epson-B11B1780...rds=epson+v700

We've had a lot of people on this board complain of auction house scans where you can't see the creases on the card. Does anyone think that those auction houses might be applying this DIGITAL ICE technology to their scans?

I have Digital Ice but mine is a couple years old and maybe the software is outdated. It's never been of much use to me on regular photographs, but will help to clean up dust and such that sticks to negatives when I'm saving stuff for my files.

As far as cleaning up creases, I can't speak for anybody else who may be artificially enhancing stuff, but sometimes they just don't show up very well on scans. They get flattened out or hidden by the light source.

I will bet that some shops have been employing the dust removal setting, whether on purpose or not, on some of their cards. That's why we see print marks and small scuffs appearing and disappearing from auction to auction on the same card.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

As far as cleaning up creases, I can't speak for anybody else who may be artificially enhancing stuff, but sometimes they just don't show up very well on scans. They get flattened out or hidden by the light source.

I once owned a slabbed card that had a tiny crease that I never could find. Eventually I sold it, the new owner cracked it out and was able to find the crease, but only once it was 'raw' again.

So it's not always intentional deception with sellers.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I have an Epson V700, which cost a lot of dough IMO and is CCD based.

I constantly have to adjust in Professional mode to try and make items look as close to realistic as possible, depending on what is being scanned.

I'm not talking brightness and contrast and such........I'm not touching those features unless it's something that legitimately needs to be touched up for non-auction/selling reasons.

I'm talking the Sharpness and Descreen features, and the levels those features are set at. A newspaper is scanned differently from a magazine which is scanned differently from a lithograph which is scanned differently from a real photo.

Sometimes on older photos with off-white borders or backs you have to disable the automatic brightness that gets implemented on the initial pre-scan because it makes it too bright and exaggerated, sometimes it comes out closer to reality and you keep it.

On many printed style baseball cards, postcards or magazines, you have to implement the descreen into magazine setting in order to keep the cross-hatch or dot patterns from over-whelming the scan, and then you have to implement the sharpness setting at the same time, in order to keep the descreen setting from dulling down the card/item too much.

A few other things, you should always be scanning in photo mode and not document mode. You should also be disabling such features as dust removal and color adjustment at all times, unless it's something not related to re-selling something.

I'm sure a lot of these large ebay consignment auction houses have several different people scanning with several different scanners, using several types of settings, and this is a reason for several of the differences you see.

Maybe I'm rambling but I hope this makes some sort of sense to somebody. Maybe I'm just worrying too much about it.

Makes perfect sense to me, Dave. I've been following this thread quietly, but you pretty well summed up my thoughts on the subject. I have 3 different scanners myself that I use for different scanning projects, and all 3 will give different results if you just throw something in there and scan away. In my experience, ALL scanners have different "factory settings" straight out of the box and/or different software for acquiring the scans which may/may not have similar "native" settings if left alone without adjustment.

To suggest that all scans of an item should look identical and match its actual appearance if you just use a "good" scanner and "don't adjust the settings" is naive at best, and to focus on whether the "color" of the card/flip/whatever is accurately represented on your monitor is like a dog chasing its tail. You know what color the flip is "supposed" to be, so just adjust the monitor on your end until that looks right. Then it won't matter whether the seller has done anything to monkey with the colors.

Now if there are specks, lines, creases, folds, tears, etc. that are visible with the card in hand that do not show up in the scan, that is another matter entirely, but still may be a result of the default settings in the scanning software. You have to remember that most scanning software is not designed with card collectors in mind. Believe it or not, the general public would actually LIKE for most tiny flaws to be removed or masked when they are scanning documents, family photos, magazine articles, etc. That is why scanning software with "Digital ICE" technology and other built-in "touch up" tools proudly state such on their packaging, and chances are, unless you "adjust" those settings (as in, turn them off), they're going to be actively cleaning up your scans straight out of the box. If you're more concerned with giving an "accurate" representation in the scanned image rather than the "best looking" image that the other 99% of non-card-collecting scanner users are going after, chances are, you're going to have to adjust some settings.

Or, you can just go with whatever the scanner poops out with its factory settings and just hope it displays accurately on the buyer's monitor. Then use the time you save by not adjusting settings to ponder why your camera won't take "good pictures" when you push the button or your television's picture always seems "too bright" when you plug it in or that song on your stereo doesn't "sound live" when you turn it on, even though you've left them all on their factory settings. Maybe you'll get lucky with factory settings, but it's more likely that you will have to make some adjustments to get your equipment to accurately reproduce real life.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

Makes perfect sense to me, Dave. I've been following this thread quietly, but you pretty well summed up my thoughts on the subject. I have 3 different scanners myself that I use for different scanning projects, and all 3 will give different results if you just throw something in there and scan away. In my experience, ALL scanners have different "factory settings" straight out of the box and/or different software for acquiring the scans which may/may not have similar "native" settings if left alone without adjustment.

To suggest that all scans of an item should look identical and match its actual appearance if you just use a "good" scanner and "don't adjust the settings" is naive at best, and to focus on whether the "color" of the card/flip/whatever is accurately represented on your monitor is like a dog chasing its tail. You know what color the flip is "supposed" to be, so just adjust the monitor on your end until that looks right. Then it won't matter whether the seller has done anything to monkey with the colors.

Now if there are specks, lines, creases, folds, tears, etc. that are visible with the card in hand that do not show up in the scan, that is another matter entirely, but still may be a result of the default settings in the scanning software. You have to remember that most scanning software is not designed with card collectors in mind. Believe it or not, the general public would actually LIKE for most tiny flaws to be removed or masked when they are scanning documents, family photos, magazine articles, etc. That is why scanning software with "Digital ICE" technology and other built-in "touch up" tools proudly state such on their packaging, and chances are, unless you "adjust" those settings (as in, turn them off), they're going to be actively cleaning up your scans straight out of the box. If you're more concerned with giving an "accurate" representation in the scanned image rather than the "best looking" image that the other 99% of non-card-collecting scanner users are going after, chances are, you're going to have to adjust some settings.

Or, you can just go with whatever the scanner poops out with its factory settings and just hope it displays accurately on the buyer's monitor. Then use the time you save by not adjusting settings to ponder why your camera won't take "good pictures" when you push the button or your television's picture always seems "too bright" when you plug it in or that song on your stereo doesn't "sound live" when you turn it on, even though you've left them all on their factory settings. Maybe you'll get lucky with factory settings, but it's more likely that you will have to make some adjustments to get your equipment to accurately reproduce real life.

Thanks Lance. I was hoping I wasn't the only one.

I remembered another thing about the "Digital Ice". It's a real memory hog and since I'm still running the same Dell computer system I was 8 years ago or so, it usually just locks everything up for 10 minutes or more while it "processes".

When I've used it for other projects it hasn't seemed to be too helpful for me, and doesn't do much more then the simpler dust removal program already does in a lot less time.

I've seen it "attempt" to fix a crease and it just comes out worse or badly shaded.........though I'm sure it's been upgraded since I got my copy of it.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I remembered another thing about the "Digital Ice". It's a real memory hog and since I'm still running the same Dell computer system I was 8 years ago or so, it usually just locks everything up for 10 minutes or more while it "processes".

When I've used it for other projects it hasn't seemed to be too helpful for me, and doesn't do much more then the simpler dust removal program already does in a lot less time.

I've seen it "attempt" to fix a crease and it just comes out worse or badly shaded.........though I'm sure it's been upgraded since I got my copy of it.

If you look at the photo comparison on Amazon for Digital-Ice, there is an old photo of a man standing up and a woman sitting down. As you can see in the photo, there is a profound difference once Digital-Ice is used. The wrinkles have disappeared almost completely.

If your computer is 8 years old and the system locks up every time you try to use Digital-Ice, that is one thing. But I doubt that would be a problem for the auction houses. We've had people on net54 provide scans where wrinkles seemed to have just disappeared from a card.

Don't you think it is possible that, in those instances, certain auction houses may have been using Digital-Ice???

[CaramelMan]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

If you look at the photo comparison on Amazon for Digital-Ice, there is an old photo of a man standing up and a woman sitting down. As you can see in the photo, there is a profound difference once Digital-Ice is used. The wrinkles have disappeared almost completely.

If your computer is 8 years old and the system locks up every time you try to use Digital-Ice, that is one thing. But I doubt that would be a problem for the auction houses. We've had people on net54 provide scans where wrinkles seemed to have just disappeared from a card.

Don't you think it is possible that, in those instances, certain auction houses may have been using Digital-Ice???

THEY WILL BE NOW

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

If you look at the photo comparison on Amazon for Digital-Ice, there is an old photo of a man standing up and a woman sitting down. As you can see in the photo, there is a profound difference once Digital-Ice is used. The wrinkles have disappeared almost completely.

If your computer is 8 years old and the system locks up every time you try to use Digital-Ice, that is one thing. But I doubt that would be a problem for the auction houses. We've had people on net54 provide scans where wrinkles seemed to have just disappeared from a card.

Don't you think it is possible that, in those instances, certain auction houses may have been using Digital-Ice???

If an auction house were inclined to do so, there are a thousand other tools I would pick over Digital Ice, though it wouldn't exactly shock me if somebody WAS using Digital Ice or any other program.

Like Lance said, a simple cloning brush will do the job better, without leaving the same sloppy evidence.

I'm sure the dust removal tool has been employed plenty, based on some of the before and after and before scans I've seen shown on Net54.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

When I've used it for other projects it hasn't seemed to be too helpful for me, and doesn't do much more then the simpler dust removal program already does in a lot less time.

That's my experience as well. No substantial difference between Digital-Ice and many of the dust/scratch removal functions built into (and automatically enabled) in many scanning programs. Useful in some situations perhaps, but certainly not the "magic fairy dust" cure-all that it's touted to be, and usually has the trade-off of a slightly-softer resulting image (as with every dust-removal fuction I've ever seen). In the cases where I really want to remove dust specks AND maintain sharpness, I have found it's better to just go in and do it manually. It may take longer, but so does painting a room with a roller and brush rather than a power sprayer. Sometimes the end result matters a little more than the time involved

And no, I don't think Digital-Ice is a looming spectre to be spoken of in hushed tones lest all auction houses should start employing it to "clean up" card scans. Anyone with an understanding of how it does what it does should be able to see its effects in a card scan, and a simple wave of the "clone" tool is far more effective in removing individual blemishes anyway. I think the example posted on Amazon in the Epson V700 write-up is an extreme example which turned out surprisingly well, and is not representative of typical results (and I suspect even it would show evidence of DI being used if a larger scan than the one posted were available). Bottom line: if a seller is determined to make a card look better than it really is, there are far more effective ways to do so than hitting the scan with a blanket Digital-Ice application.