Scanners For Coins

Scanners are really, really bad for imaging coins. Probably the worst thing possible. If your camera has a macro mode, even if it's a very poor one, it will do better than any scanner.

I would suggest not including coin scanning in your considerations. Generally, anything that makes it a good scanner for other purposes will make it better at scanning coins. Maybe you can try some different scanners at the store. But it will still be a really bad way to make images of a coin. Better to learn how to make the most of your camera and not worry about coins while buying the scanner.

I tend to disagree. You are never, ever going to use a scanner's maximum resolution to image a coin, because the resulting file size will bring all but the strongest computer to its' knees the minute you open your postprocessing software. Example: My Canon T2i, an 18MP dSLR, creates image files of around 7MB. Scan the same coin at, say, 1600dpi and you're looking at a 300MB output file. You're going to need to be around 800dpi to end up with something your computer won't curse you for, and just about any production scanner can do that easily.

Which brings me to the important point - postprocessing. You aren't going to create scanned coin images that satisfy you until you're competent with some sort of capable postprocessing software, because at a minimum you're going to need to sharpen the output of any scanner, and likely tweak the color settings. If you see scanned images here that turn you off, it's not the scanner but the user's lack of postprocessing skills. Most factory scanner software is not particularly capable when it comes to creating sharp coin images - that's simply not what scanners are for, and although we use them that way, we're an extremely small minority of a customer base which is scanning flat sheets of paper with writing on them. That's a very different animal than a coin. So, you're going to be doing your scans with the factory software set for the least-possible intervention, and getting the real work done in post.

In the words of my hero, Robert Heinlein, TANSTAAFL. There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. This is especially true with imaging coins; the less you spend on equipment, the more you'll have to learn and the more skill you'll have to develop in post to create quality images.

There is no Easy Button.

A scanner can produce adequate pictures, the question is are you willing to settle for adequate?

I've taken 2x2 pages or pages from dansco albums and laid them flat on the scanner just so I'd have a record of them or know which holes were empty or which had poor condition coins deserving an upgrade.

Also if I get a handful of coins from wherever I can scan them all at once and save the image as '08-01-2012coinstore.jpg' which makes me feel like I'm keeping things organized. Then I throw them in the back of a drawer.

So these scanned images are ok for record keeping, and maybe for selling on ebay, but not for showing off your favorite coins to online friends. If your goal is to take beautiful pictures like you see on this forum I don't think you'll be able to. I don't know anything about a Nikon 8000 but I'd recommend you spend some time experimenting with it.

I have an old cheap 3.9 megapixel point-and-shoot that I like to take pictures with. I fiddle with the orientation and lighting and everything. But my images can only be so big, and a scanner definitely produces larger images. See my pictures in this thread featuring a 1939 nickel. The first image was from my cheap digicam, the followups were from the scanner.

If you _do_ plan on scanning paper money, you might be unpleasantly surprised. There are many threads on this and other forums about the inability to scan newfangled currency.

I have a Brother b&w laser printer/scanner/copier. I don't know anything about scanner specifications to know how one would be better than another. . .

-wheatiefan

any experience with using a "hood" type configuration for pics ?