Scan or Picture?

[carlton91]

Hey Guys,

I am in the process of making a NBA photbucket.

I am not sure if I should scan the pictures or just take the photos?

Please cast your vote

Cheers
Justin

 

[ozballer23]

Scan for sure, potential traders/buyers can see the card more clearly!

 

[hairyangryfella]

As Norm said - scans are generally clearer.
However some cards are best photographed to capture their design - so it depends on the card, but generally scan would be the one to go with.

 

[ozballer23]

As Norm said - scans are generally clearer.
However some cards are best photographed to capture their design - so it depends on the card, but generally scan would be the one to go with.

I find it hard to scan graded cards, they don't come up as clear so I use photos

\

Same as refractors, they are hard to show up in scans toom so hold them on an angle and use a photo!

Scan

Pic

Scan

Pic

 

[carlton91]

Looks like I have to start scanning

 

[hairyangryfella]

Yeah anything refractor-like or holographic or anything is probably best to photograph. Here's a comparison I happen to be able to provide:

Camera -

Scan -

 

[ozballer23]

Yeah anything refractor-like or holographic or anything is probably best to photograph. Here's a comparison I happen to be able to provide:

Camera -

Scan -

Straight away you can clearly see the detail within the scans compared to the picture.

 

[WoobieZarz]

On the same topic, what's a good/acceptible DPI to scan with these days?

I think I used to scan at around 600DPI, but they were too large, and when they were reduced to thumbnails, they looked crap. I think I'm scanning around 300DPI these days, but they still look crap:

Maybe I need a new scanner. Currently (or still) using my HP2610 All-In-1, which has a scanner bed on top of the printer.

 

[drob50]

Yeah, scan is the way to go as a general rule as it shows the condition of the cards better, but some cards definitely need a photo to show it as it really is!

This card is blue in hand:

but the scanner makes it look purple

 

[WoobieZarz]

^Yep, I've seen blue GU pieces scan up green too. And green scan brown.

Some scanners simply don't do the cards justice!

 

[gemini0928]

Scan is better but sometimes it's hard to scan some cards to show its real look like the refractors and some sparkly cards.

I find it hard to scan graded cards, they don't come up as clear so I use photos

\

Yeah scanning those BGS are abit tricky. I think its the gold label stamps and the penny sleeves that makes it harder.

But I don't seem to get any issues with the PSA's:

 

[gemini0928]

I use 300DPI with my daughter's EPSON Stylus NX130. It cost me $40 at Dicksmith a few months ago. It works great. Just have to play with the settings everytime i scan something.

On the same topic, what's a good/acceptible DPI to scan with these days?

I think I used to scan at around 600DPI, but they were too large, and when they were reduced to thumbnails, they looked crap. I think I'm scanning around 300DPI these days, but they still look crap:

Maybe I need a new scanner. Currently (or still) using my HP2610 All-In-1, which has a scanner bed on top of the printer.

 

[WoobieZarz]

^Thanks Alf.

Question, does that look alright above?

 

[gemini0928]

It looks alrite. Those shiny gold cards are hard to scan to have a result that will be close to its original color. And I just like scanning the cards with a darker background/outline to really make the card stand out.

^Thanks Alf.

Question, does that look alright above?

 

[KB.]

I personally use a camera only because I don't have a scanner. I find with the camera is can show off some cards way better eg below. But sometimes it's quite hard to get a nice shot depending on the finish of the card and lighting etc. I would prefer to use a scanner and have said for the past year I'd get one but I've been to lazy