The Chip Board
Custom Search
   


The Chip Board Archive 08

You can also reduce size +

keep higher resolution.

I scan chips at 300 DPI at 70% of original. That way they are not giant oversized, but hold enough detail for someone who wants to look at most of the details.

I have used a digital camera, which is fast and easy, but results aren't as easy in the long run, because you need to set up proper lighting to get a good image.

Note the shadow from the scanner. The way to avoid this with a camera would be two lights from 45 degrees to the front and a reflector in the back, filling in the shadows from the overhead lighting. (see that's why a scanner is easier!) grin Or use natural light and have conditions change every day.

The image attached to this post is 8.5KB or 8,704 bytes. That's a low compression JPG file. Not much space used. You can fit a large number of chip images on floppy disks, which are low tech and cheap!

On a CD I could probably scan 7,000 individual chip images at an even larger size.

Remember that for use on the web you want a GIF or JPG file. So instead of storing in TIF or BMP (larger and slightly better quality) and then having to convert for use, I prefer to use a simple universal readable file type, JPG.

Yes you can scan a batch of chips at once, then cut them out of the large image, one by one. It makes quick work of scanning and saves time.

Most printers have 600 DPI resolution, but even if you have a better one at 1200 DPI, how much ink do you want to waste on a picture of a casino chip? vbg

IMPORTANT: WHen you scna the chips, use the size reduction so you get your original scan without changing size. Any expansion or reduction, will degrade the image quality. For example a huge 2400 DPI scan that will take up a whole screen plus some, reduced to 300 pixels, will look worse than a 300 DPI image, saved at it's original size.

Below is 300 DPI scanned at 70%, which gives me (personal opinion) a optimum resolution, size for the web and small enough size for web and floppy storage. It loads fast so people will see it and not sit for 45 seconds waiting (or NOT waiting) for a picture to load. Most of the time when someone has some huge scan included in their message, I read the text and click off without bothering to wait.

Not everyone has cable or DSL some of us use dial up. lol

Messages In This Thread

Question on archiving chip images
Re: Question on archiving chip images
Thanks Larry and Don...I never thought of flash
Re: Thanks Larry and Don...I never thought of flas
Re: Question on archiving chip images
Re: Question on archiving chip images
Re: Question on archiving chip images
Re: Question on archiving chip images
Re: Question on archiving chip images
I knew there was a wealth of information here!
Image size and resolution
Re: A little more to the point...
You can also reduce size +
Re: You can also reduce size +
You guys are 'da bomb!!! Thanks...

Copyright 2022 David Spragg