«

I have seen a couple of sites recently where images of 3D objects (eg
flowers) have been created using a flat bed scanner.
The images appear exactly as if taken with a camera (with macro lens) ie no
flat sections because it is sitting on a scanner.

Images are crystal clear with white backgrounds etc.

Can anyone explain how these images of 3D objects are created using a
scanner?

Any attempts to replicate this have turned out very ordinary.

regards

PeterH

"My View" <no spam > wrote in message
news:g_6mh.16628$...
>I have seen a couple of sites recently where images of 3D objects (eg
>flowers) have been created using a flat bed scanner.
> The images appear exactly as if taken with a camera (with macro lens) ie
> no flat sections because it is sitting on a scanner.
>
> Images are crystal clear with white backgrounds etc.
>
> Can anyone explain how these images of 3D objects are created using a
> scanner?
>
> Any attempts to replicate this have turned out very ordinary.

Most scanners will do this fairly easily. If a scanner uses a mirror and
lens arrangement to focus the image on the detector, there is generally
enough depth of field to do a satisfactory image of small objects.

Other scanners use a linear array of detectors, called a contact image
sensor, that is as close as possible to the material being scanned - these
have almost no depth of field, and produce a poor image of objects placed on
the scanner bed.

http://www.scantips.com/chap3c.html (look for "CCD or CIS sensors").
--

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/

Thanks Mike.
I have a Canon scanner with CIS - that would explain the poor quality scan
of 3D objects.
PeterH


"Mike Russell" <RE--MOVE> wrote in message
news:EZfmh.24909$ et...
> "My View" <no spam > wrote in message
> news:g_6mh.16628$...
>>I have seen a couple of sites recently where images of 3D objects (eg
>>flowers) have been created using a flat bed scanner.
>> The images appear exactly as if taken with a camera (with macro lens) ie
>> no flat sections because it is sitting on a scanner.
>>
>> Images are crystal clear with white backgrounds etc.
>>
>> Can anyone explain how these images of 3D objects are created using a
>> scanner?
>>
>> Any attempts to replicate this have turned out very ordinary.
>
> Most scanners will do this fairly easily. If a scanner uses a mirror and
> lens arrangement to focus the image on the detector, there is generally
> enough depth of field to do a satisfactory image of small objects.
>
> Other scanners use a linear array of detectors, called a contact image
> sensor, that is as close as possible to the material being scanned - these
> have almost no depth of field, and produce a poor image of objects placed
> on the scanner bed.
>
> http://www.scantips.com/chap3c.html (look for "CCD or CIS sensors").
> --
>
> Mike Russell
> www.curvemeister.com/forum/
>
>

Hi Peter,


>> I have seen a couple of sites recently where images of 3D objects (eg
flowers) have been created using a flat bed scanner.
The images appear exactly as if taken with a camera (with macro lens)
ie no
flat sections because it is sitting on a scanner.

> Images are crystal clear with white backgrounds etc.

> Can anyone explain how these images of 3D objects are created using a
> scanner?

>Any attempts to replicate this have turned out very ordinary.<<



Quite awhile back, I did fossils on a flat bed scanner that came out
pretty good.

If I were trying to get 3D images from flowers - I might try with a
soft white cloth to cover the flower(s) during scan and not put scanner
cover down.

I might try this myself - if time opens up (unlikely).

Good luck with your efforts.


Best,

Conrad
Camp Sherman, Oregon

"My View" <no spam > writes:
> Can anyone explain how these images of 3D objects are created using a
> scanner?
>
> Any attempts to replicate this have turned out very ordinary.

You have to use the big clunky type of scanner with the long optical
path, to get any depth of field.

This is the website I was talking about
http://www.pbase.com/accordsystems/floral_scanography


"Conrad" <> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Hi Peter,
>
>
>>> I have seen a couple of sites recently where images of 3D objects (eg
> flowers) have been created using a flat bed scanner.
> The images appear exactly as if taken with a camera (with macro lens)
> ie no
> flat sections because it is sitting on a scanner.
>
>> Images are crystal clear with white backgrounds etc.
>
>> Can anyone explain how these images of 3D objects are created using a
>> scanner?
>
> >Any attempts to replicate this have turned out very ordinary.<<
>
>
>
> Quite awhile back, I did fossils on a flat bed scanner that came out
> pretty good.
>
> If I were trying to get 3D images from flowers - I might try with a
> soft white cloth to cover the flower(s) during scan and not put scanner
> cover down.
>
> I might try this myself - if time opens up (unlikely).
>
> Good luck with your efforts.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Conrad
> Camp Sherman, Oregon
>

In article <JbBmh.349$>,
"My View" <no spam > wrote:

> This is the website I was talking about
> http://www.pbase.com/accordsystems/floral_scanography

I've seen some like these before, and impressed I was then, too. I'd be
interested to know for what she used the transparency adapter.
Unfortunately there is no way of contacting the photographer except by
leaving a guest-book entry, and she doesn't appear to have replied to
any of the entries she already has.

--
Justin C, by the sea.

There was an article a year or so ago about a scan-photographer in one
of the magazines I get. It might have been Studio Photography. I recall
that he used monofilament fishing line to hold hold flowers and avoid
the squished-on-the-glass look. Sorry, that's all I remember about it.
Tom Nelson
Tom Nelson Photography

I know that some Linotype (professional grade) flatbed scanners were pretty
good at scanning 3D - objects, googling for it I found a couple of links.
One of them is:

http://www.flatbed-scanner-review.or...lberg_CPS.html

I wrote "were" because the company discontinued the product line, but I am
sure that many are still in use.

I came across this article yesterday http://tinyurl.com/y68uhm


"Tom Nelson" <> wrote in message
news:030120071244068929% m.invalid...
> There was an article a year or so ago about a scan-photographer in one
> of the magazines I get. It might have been Studio Photography. I recall
> that he used monofilament fishing line to hold hold flowers and avoid
> the squished-on-the-glass look. Sorry, that's all I remember about it.
> Tom Nelson
> Tom Nelson Photography