36 replies to this topic

[top1percent]

So what is the best method for scanning full playfields? I've got perfect Monday Night Football, Maverick and Whitewater (not that we need Whitewater) playfields that are stripped and ready to be scanned. I've also got an HP4610 flatbed scanner that allows me to lay the scanner directly on the playfield. The issue I have is piecing the scans together. No matter how hard I try they just don't line up exactly. Is there an easy method to this that I'm missing? Any help is appreciated and I'll be glad to upload what I've got. Also, what dpi are ya'll using?

Thanks,

Brad

Your close. NOS means New Old stock in the pinball world. Means it's original new parts.

More are on the way, but it takes awhile to get these scanned in and pieced together as one big file.

I was just handed a CD of ACDC scanned today .... if you would like to piece it together, I could send it your way.

I would love an ACDC playfield scan. that would be awesome.

[CaptainNeo]

that's the same scanner we use. You need special software that pieces them together for you, but they require certain amount of overlap. I usually do 150 or 300 DPI. Plumb is the master of stitching. I don't have the free time to do it.

[Osprey101]

So what is the best method for scanning full playfields? I've got perfect Monday Night Football, Maverick and Whitewater (not that we need Whitewater) playfields that are stripped and ready to be scanned. I've also got an HP4610 flatbed scanner that allows me to lay the scanner directly on the playfield. The issue I have is piecing the scans together. No matter how hard I try they just don't line up exactly. Is there an easy method to this that I'm missing? Any help is appreciated and I'll be glad to upload what I've got. Also, what dpi are ya'll using?

Thanks,

Brad

The very BEST method (and the only acceptable method for CPR) is a full size scan done with a Cruse scanner. They are large enough to scan the entire pf in one scan. As I posted earlier, if you post a thread on RGP asking for the closest Cruse scanner, someone will reply. If you tell me where you are, I may be able to find out also. RGP may be faster though... lol
Stitched images are not accurate. They may work for VP, but they will not work for a full size, accurate reproduction.
Also, for those that don't know...
Photographic resolution is only 72ppi at size. However, if you have any text or straight lines, you must use a much higher resolution. The magic number then becomes 300ppi at full size. That is the final resolution required by any professional printer.
Regarding resolutions:
It is important to understand resolutions a little. Take an image at 300ppi at, lets say, 12" x 12" and make that image 24" x 24" without changing the resolution. Now you have an image that is 24" x 24" at 150ppi. Very simple math.
A second example would be a reverse of the previous example; take an image that is 12" x 12" at 72ppi. Now without messing with the resolution settings, make that image 6" x 6" and you will have an image with a resolution of 144ppi

[user42]

that's the same scanner we use. You need special software that pieces them together for you, but they require certain amount of overlap. I usually do 150 or 300 DPI. Plumb is the master of stitching. I don't have the free time to do it.

What software pieces them together for you? I could do it in photoshop but it is not really something that is "easy" to do....

[Plumb]

So what is the best method for scanning full playfields? I've got perfect Monday Night Football, Maverick and Whitewater (not that we need Whitewater) playfields that are stripped and ready to be scanned. I've also got an HP4610 flatbed scanner that allows me to lay the scanner directly on the playfield. The issue I have is piecing the scans together. No matter how hard I try they just don't line up exactly. Is there an easy method to this that I'm missing? Any help is appreciated and I'll be glad to upload what I've got. Also, what dpi are ya'll using?

Thanks,

Brad

The very BEST method (and the only acceptable method for CPR) is a full size scan done with a Cruse scanner. They are large enough to scan the entire pf in one scan. As I posted earlier, if you post a thread on RGP asking for the closest Cruse scanner, someone will reply. If you tell me where you are, I may be able to find out also. RGP may be faster though... lol
Stitched images are not accurate. They may work for VP, but they will not work for a full size, accurate reproduction.
Also, for those that don't know...
Photographic resolution is only 72ppi at size. However, if you have any text or straight lines, you must use a much higher resolution. The magic number then becomes 300ppi at full size. That is the final resolution required by any professional printer.
Regarding resolutions:
It is important to understand resolutions a little. Take an image at 300ppi at, lets say, 12" x 12" and make that image 24" x 24" without changing the resolution. Now you have an image that is 24" x 24" at 150ppi. Very simple math.
A second example would be a reverse of the previous example; take an image that is 12" x 12" at 72ppi. Now without messing with the resolution settings, make that image 6" x 6" and you will have an image with a resolution of 144ppi

Museums effectively use stitched scans and photographs to create museum quality full size (or larger than full size) reproductions of delicate museum pieces. Photographs introduce lens curvature and imperfections, but a talented professional will know these flaws and will program their software accordingly. 'Perfect' stitches are a function of the method of reproducible scanning and photgraphing techniques and software that understands the flaws in the camera and/or scanner dynamic and compliments the instrument used to collect the images. CPR not allowing stitches is a problem with them and not necessarily with stitching in general. Vectorizing images can also be a lossy function and introduce error (how close to the actual curves and lines source material does the reproduction artist trace)? An example of error introduced into a CPR production can be shown in their Xenon playfield. I can point out about ten flaws in their reproduction as compared to an actual NOS playfield.

While I'm tangenting off to NOS playfields... The pinball companies themselves introduced error all the time between batches of playfields as each color screen is added to the playfield. Any variance on the registration will produce errors and nearly every playfield and some backglasses have issues throughout all companies and eras. Occasionally they missed screens completely and they still do. Inks sourced for playfields and backglasses are never exactly the same color either, so there is variance added in that way as well.

Back to the scanning.. Yes.. Cruse scanners are a very good way to obtain a very high quality scan for a backglass or playfield and require a lot less hassle but more cash outlay. Regardless of the method used, I recommend scanning at least double the target resolution. So if you were aiming to print back to a playfield or backglass in color, then 150-200 DPI would be your lowest target resolution. Though I would recommend 300DPI. If you were scanning for this reason, the source scan would be 300/400-600 DPI accordingly.

Please also scan (and stitch) in a lossless format. Common lossless formats are TIF, BMP, and PNG. JPGs, unless the newer and far less common lossless JPG format is used, introduce error as they try to approximate the final image with varying degrees of success. I like PNG because it compresses losslessly very well, especially for reduced color images. Most older playfields have 8-12 actual screen colors. PNG isn't perfect, but it is a good for this application.

I'll PM some suggestions on scanning and stitching as soon as I look up the 4610 scanner. If it is the same or similar to the 4600/4670 then you will want about eight rows of three scans = 24 total scans at double your target resolution. I would suggest you actually scan at 300 or 600 DPI so that you could use the result for multiple purposes, helping restoring real playfields and reproduce the tables in VP. Downsampling the images is a no brainer.

Hope that helps and fogive me for my lengthy post. I've been hovering around the VP scene but have mostly moved on to helping restorers restore real playfields and help reproducers make parts for older pinball machines.

[Plumb]

that's the same scanner we use. You need special software that pieces them together for you, but they require certain amount of overlap. I usually do 150 or 300 DPI. Plumb is the master of stitching. I don't have the free time to do it.

What software pieces them together for you? I could do it in photoshop but it is not really something that is "easy" to do....

Here are some of the better ones I use or have used.

Arcsoft made a program called Scan N Stitch Deluxe that was specifically targeted to stitching scanned images (not panoramas). They still may make and sell it for an affordable price. It is very easy to use and usually does a very good job autostitching scans.

PTGUI can be used to stitch scanned source images. There are special instructions on the software makers site that direct the user to what parameters and methods to use. It may introduce a very low bit of error into the final result it is usually trying to compensate for lens curvature in photographs. I haven't looked into exactly what it turns on or off when the suggested settings are used but the results can be very good. An additional benefit to using PTGUI is that you can correct the landmark points it uses if they are incorrectly matching spots in different scans. Watch what scale PTGUI is outputting as I believe it chooses a much smaller resolution target.

Autopano another good program for stitching panoramas and scanned images. I haven't used this as much but it is a very popular program. This may also have the output scale image issue that PTGUI has.

Microsoft ICE is a free program that can produce excellent results. Be very careful with using it though as it will likely select an incorrect 'Camera Motion' parameter. Always use 'Planar Motion 1' to stitch scans. If a different 'Camera Motion' parameter is used to stitch the scans I can guarantee all sorts of error in the final result.

Hope that helps.

[user42]

Thanks.

[CaptainNeo]

So what is the best method for scanning full playfields? I've got perfect Monday Night Football, Maverick and Whitewater (not that we need Whitewater) playfields that are stripped and ready to be scanned. I've also got an HP4610 flatbed scanner that allows me to lay the scanner directly on the playfield. The issue I have is piecing the scans together. No matter how hard I try they just don't line up exactly. Is there an easy method to this that I'm missing? Any help is appreciated and I'll be glad to upload what I've got. Also, what dpi are ya'll using?

Thanks,

Brad

The very BEST method (and the only acceptable method for CPR) is a full size scan done with a Cruse scanner. They are large enough to scan the entire pf in one scan. As I posted earlier, if you post a thread on RGP asking for the closest Cruse scanner, someone will reply. If you tell me where you are, I may be able to find out also. RGP may be faster though... lol
Stitched images are not accurate. They may work for VP, but they will not work for a full size, accurate reproduction.
Also, for those that don't know...
Photographic resolution is only 72ppi at size. However, if you have any text or straight lines, you must use a much higher resolution. The magic number then becomes 300ppi at full size. That is the final resolution required by any professional printer.
Regarding resolutions:
It is important to understand resolutions a little. Take an image at 300ppi at, lets say, 12" x 12" and make that image 24" x 24" without changing the resolution. Now you have an image that is 24" x 24" at 150ppi. Very simple math.
A second example would be a reverse of the previous example; take an image that is 12" x 12" at 72ppi. Now without messing with the resolution settings, make that image 6" x 6" and you will have an image with a resolution of 144ppi

Yes cruse scanners do a fantastic job, and I received a catalog to purchase one. Like I said. $100k is too much for a scanner for my purposes. And for VP stuff, it's really not warrented. If I could get a nice large format scanner for 2k, that would be ideal for me and basically what i'm looking for. For me, I have many reasons to have these playfield art files on hand, Just happens the also work for you guys too. So it's a win win situation. But for now, we are going to have stitch together, because i'm not paying $40 a pop, to have someone with a cruze scanner scan in stuff. If he could do a whole stack of 50 or so playfields for $40...then yes, i'd go that route, but it's unfeasable, for something that doesn't make any money. Stitching is time consuming, but free for us to do.

btw, if any of you guys have playfields, or know someone who has playfields and you live near milwaukee or chicago. Your more than welcome to bring them over, and we'll quickly scan them in and stitch them together for upload to VP. If it's anything we don't already have on file. we have around 40 or 50 playfields altogether, so let me know. Everyone who submits playfields, of course gets full credit on the uploads too.

[maceman]

These are looking amazing!! Thanx for your hard work here!!

Maceman

ps. Oh yeah, NOS= New Old Stock, you're right... it has been several years since i collected anything

[Bob Creepy]

Any chance of a bally space invaders scan? I'm trying to bring a basketcase back to life...

[top1percent]

This is great information. Sorry for the typo earlier, I actually own a 4670.

Brad

[CaptainNeo]

unfortunately I don't have a space invaders on file yet. But I may soon. Did a couple of quotes for SI the past couple months, so one will probably be showing up soon.

[thewool]

In terms of playfields if you get any 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' stuff it would be much appreciated!

I know this is a 'kids' game but after playing no real pinball for 9 months, I played the real thing for 3 hours straight yesterday - Cowabunga!!!

I think Data East's tables were notoriously difficult to strip but I would really like to give the VP9 version some realism. It doesn't look bad but could be made more to look like the real table IMHO.

Cheers, Kris

[CaptainNeo]

actually DE are easier, because the pop bumper housing is all one piece. Just unscrew and the whole thing drops down. Where B/W stuff, you have to clip the lamp socket, and take off the sandwich from both sides of the playfield.

[Bob Creepy]

Did a Space Invaders ever surface?

[CaptainNeo]

still no SI yet.  But I do have some new stuff here, that we will have uploaded for you guys in a month or two.  Some nice older stuff.  Like Genie, and Gottleib Circus. 

[maceman]

I'd love to see the genie stuff since i am currently plugging away on that one!

Cheers,

MAceman