I've scanned a few playfields now

Speed - It seems like only that first run has the big delay, all scans after the initial one start right away for me... is this not the case for u?
Mechanics - I do try to line it up with the edge but sometimes I do have problems stitching. I seldom do anything with the stitched file anyway so this has not been an issue. Maybe I'll try to put down a straight edge and ensure things are on the same axis.
Resolution - I thought that I read somewhere that 300 dpi is fine. The first couple playfields that I did, I scanned in both 300 and 600 cause I was not sure. I ended up doing all the work with the 300 dpi files anyway. Now I just scan at 300 dpi.
Stitching - There are a few free software packages out there. I've used PhotoSticher https://www.photostitcher.com/

Not really. Once you hit the scan button in the software, it's up to the hardware to spring into action. You could also try the NAPS2 scanning software instead to see if that makes a difference.

https://www.naps2.com/

I usually ensure there is about 2" of overlap on each edge for each scan. That's so the stitching software has something to actually stitch. Trying to stich from edge to edge on each scan with no overlap will not result in a good stitch.

I don't do any precision horizontal/vertical alignment. I can always rotate images later if necessary if the stitching software is acting goofy with a particular image. As long as the orientation of the stitched images is roughly the same, I don't usually have too much trouble with it.

I scan in 600. You can always reduce resolution later if you want. It's harder to get detail from a lower resolution scan if you need that detail later.

There should be an option to not 'warm up' the lamp - this takes 30 seconds if left on. Hopefully the driver in question has this option. It's supposed to give better color scanning accuracy but in most cases, you are scanning to retouch up stuff anyway so you can color correct then.

I try to scan in a regular grid pattern. I have had trouble sometimes stitching everything at once, and found I had more success stitching the rows or columns individually, then stitch the stitched images. I have been using Microsoft's https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/product/computational-photography-applications/image-composite-editor/ ; but would be interested to know if there are better options (looks like ICE is dead now! )

600 DPI is a good resolution if you are creating vector graphics on top of your scan; higher than that it can get unwieldy. At that resolution, you can actually get a good idea of the dpi of the screen used to print the playfield if you find a good stair-step pattern.

600 dpi can get massive, I do 300 these days for everything and you'd never be able to tell the difference. Much less editing in photoshop later.

Interesting, I only do 150. I'll have to try 300 on my next project one and see how the editing is.

Take a scan at 300dpi and another at 600 and print them out and let your eyes make the call

For a high quality print, 600 is basically standard. Below that, lines and colors can start to get fuzzy.

What I do, in Photoshop, place two scans in the same workspace, adjust the opacity of the top layer to 50%, then adjust the angles and alignment little by little until the alignment is perfect. Takes a little time but from my limited experience, it's often much better than the auto alignment (photomerge) function by its self. Once two layers are done, drag in the third, use same method as above and then repeat.
I often adjust the angle by 0.01 degrees at a time.

pasted_image (resized).png

pasted_image (resized).png

How is everyone dealing with the banding issues the 4600 produces?

I re-create every line / color / font etc, therefor banding is not a real issue for me.

I have scanned a lot of backglasses and playfields with the HP4600.

300 dpi is all that is needed to get excellent results

Save and edit in .tiff format

Overlap is very important I have found. With my experience I found that more overlap means better stitching. I now do at least 25% (visual judge) or more overlap.

I use Photoshop Elements for stitching. The PhotoMerge command. Makes perfect playfield and backglass stitches, no moving things around after.
Again: It is the amount of overlap that affects the accuracy of the stitch. I don't have to adjust my first stitch because I use a lot of overlap.

Banding seems to show up on backglasses more than anywhere else for me. Since I redraw/edit just about 100% of the scan to make it sharp the banding just disappears.

Overlap and graphic editing are my two main points.

Alan

4600 (resized).JPG

There's so much good advice in here, it's great. This guy knows what he's doing. More overlap is the key. It gives the algorithm more to distinguish and use for reference and therefore, make a better stitch. Then, if you decide to redraw everything, do it in a vector program(like Illustrator) and everything will be crisp and clean with no loss in resolution when scaling up or down in size or when you send it out to get printed.

Photoshop. File > Automate > Photomerge
Wrks pretty well, the more overlap the better

Thanks for the tip on stitching together rows or columns and then stitching the composites together. As an aside, if you are scanning a white wood, it can be hard to get the stitch algorithm to work with relatively bank areas. I took a pencil and a T square, making a grid on the white wood before scanning. Another thing that is helpful is if you are scanning with the intent to use the image in CAD, put a metal ruler on your whitewood so that you can calibrate your images to your CAD software.

Photoshop's automated photomerge can stick overlapping scans together to look good visually, but I have found it to be wildly inaccurate, even when restricting it to only rearrange (no warp or perspective correction). There may be other software that does a more technically accurate job, but I've switched to stitching playfield scans by hand using the "Difference" blending layer to make sure that there is perfect alignment. Takes a little more time but it is worth knowing that everything can be recreated accurately.

Difference blending layer in photoshop?

Not sure his method is the same as mine but:

https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/scanjet-4600-recommendation-on-workflow#post-6840590

By setting the top layer to difference you can see exactly where things do/don't line up easier than using transparency. Once it goes black you're at 100%.

Screenshot 2022-03-25 112446 (resized).jpg

THANKS! Once you get this setup this is gloriously easy to use... hit one button for a 600dpi scan, move scanner, repeat until done, hit "Save Images" and it exports individual lossless TIFFs to my OneDrive.

Screenshot_195.png

Mine is one tool I would not part with. I keep waiting for somebody to make a better scanner for large flat objects