Need Help With A Scott 63B - Ben Franklin

Ya..guess you guys are 100% right and I am 100% wrong..But before I go, just for a laugh, read the first two paragraphs and especially the second one ..Have a good evening guys...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwyddi...8software%29

BTW..OXFORD UNIVERSITY ALSO USES THE SAME SOFTWARE I USE..

Wert, I think that there is some confusion. The wikipedia article you link to states:

A 2D image can contain height information if another channel of data is ignored such as color or it is a specialized image file type that includes additional information. The height field images that it refers to are 2D images which represent the third axis as

Depending on file type, the third axis can be included in many ways. essayk's original jpg never included any information about the third axis. It is impossible to obtain height information from a scanned image in the way that you are attempting to. I commend the effort, but it just isn't possible as you depict.

Having said that...

essayk's image does have some height/3rd axis information in the form of focus. With my scanner in my experience, I see obvious blurring if I stack two covers next to each other to scan their stamps to try to maximize what I can fit onto the scanner area. The thickness of two layers of an envelope and a stamp will provide an obviously blurred image for the overlying cover if I don't apply a significant weight to the scanner cover.

essayk's image shows very minimal if not an absence of blurring of the region around the "blob". This makes me think that the blob is around the same thickness of the stamp itself. It will take him to mention how thick it appears to be.

I have some other observations after some rest and more time to think about it. It's not perfectly round, but it doesn't have the appearance that one would expect if it's path of travel was not close to straight from above. Maybe we could consult some crime scene reference for blood spatter analysis. I imagine that the ink would be thicker, but maybe an equation could be found that could help us interpret an angle of approach based on the blob's width versus length considering the viscosity.

It doesn't appear to have any adhesion nor "squishing" affect from another sheet of stamps placed on top of it. Maybe it was the last sheet of the day? I would think that possibility would excluded because there would not be a next sheet of stamps for the plate to be prepared for. Also, the blob is thick enough that one would expect that it would be even more "wet" than the intended impression. The intended impression would generally dry enough to only leave a minor amount of set-off. The intended impression obviously consists of much thinner areas of ink. However the intended impression was literally impressed into the paper so would be less likely to transfer ink to an overlying sheet in the first place. There are many variables to consider.

essayk, can you view the outline of the blob under high magnification? Can you observe the profile of the edge of the blob? Does it seem to wrap under a bit before it contacts the paper? Does the edge go straight up or at an angle towards the center of the blob? Does the top/flat surface of the blob seem to be consistent in height?

I'm no expert on blob analysis, but maybe further observations can give us some more clues as to how it came to be. Regardless, I am enjoying trying to narrow the conjecture down into likely hypotheses with each bit of additional information.

Historical DNA Collector...Are you coming around to the DARK SIDE...???...HAHA

Wert, I'm not sure of what you mean. I am trying to respectfully inform you that you are mistaken in the information that you are trying to present. I have no desire to present anyone in a negative light. Despite our disagreement of the topic of hand, I only intend to provide accurate information. I do not know what you are trying to accomplish with your last post.

Relax guys, no need to get into anything. This was meant to be a light diversion (though the technical intricacies are delightful).

HDNA The stamp is tied up for now with a group in another project which I can't disrupt. But once I have finished with it there, I will get some images with my photomacrography setup and also with a USB microscope. Then we can get some side-view contour shots and what not. I'll revive the thread when I can post them, but it won't be immediately. Sorry.

BTW your comment regarding blurring due to focal differences in stacked objects struck home with me, since I ran into that a month or so ago while scanning a bunch of proofs. I had not tried adding weight then, but when I did the scan you see here, I used two large books on the cover to keep things flat. A couple of Roosevelt die proofs tended to bow a bit and it was showing in an early scan. I just hope my solution to that didn't damage the blob (but I haven't looked yet).

Historical DNA Collector my friend...I will admit that I DO NOT have the stamp ability as you have..especially American stamps and I commend you on your expertises..But I consider myself a fairly good expert on "FLYSPECKING", and having the ability to go out to find software to adapt to this great hobby..My goal is to find software that can be used by people on this forum as a tool, nothing else, and it will NOT replace a good eye and a magnifying glass for analysis..

If what I am trying to do irritates you, then there is no problem, I will re frame from offering any suggestions (software wise) to my (our) American friends and will offer such suggestions back on the Canadian side...Only trying to help with my limited knowledge of stamps..

Robert

Wert:

Please do not turn this into a cross-border skirmish! You always post interesting threads and I usually learn something from them. Keep them coming. That is the purpose of this forum. We love Canada over here!

Grape jelly

What is that suppose to mean..??

I took it to mean that it is Stampcrow's theory that grape jelly is the cause of the blob on the stamp....

Oh, ok....haha

Wert, please don't make this a cross-border skirmish. Neeskens13 pointed it out, yet you ingnore the warnings.

U.S. and Canadian political interests have conflicted a lot lately. Please don't force me to buy a bunch of guns to prepare for your country's inevitable invasion of us.

As much as I love real maple syrup, I will not back away from a conflict where a restriction of poutine is used as a method of intimidation.

Regardless, you're too late Lord Werter. Oh, you think the darkness is your ally, but you merely adopted stamp identification. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see the light until I was already a man; by then, it was nothing to me but blinding! The shadows betray you, because they belong to me. I will show you where I have made my home, whilst preparing to bring proper stamp identification. Then, I will break you. Your precious armoury, gratefully accepted. We will need it. Ah yes, I was wondering what would break first. Your spirit, or your ability to accurately identify stamps.

--------------------------------------
On a more serious note:

Historical DNA Collector...Are you coming around to the DARK SIDE...???...HAHA

Wert, along with the post after this one, I now understand that you were making a joke about how I am getting addicted to flyspeck philately. I am not addicted, but I do relate to the "DARK SIDE" in that I truly enjoy trying to understand the minutia of a particular stamp.

I am a very literal person who doesn't "get" sarcasm, obscure references, and whatnot easily. My last post is very accurate if taken at face value. I just didn't understand it at the time without further indication that it was a teasing and lighthearted reference.

I personally do not think that you should refrain from posting on this subforum. "Outside" opinion can be very valuable.

At times you do post replies that could be interpreted as a bit dramatic. Regardless, I am glad that you contribute here.

I still am uncertain if you understand the inability for scans to include the 3rd axis/height information. If you need further explanation, ask and I'll gladly try to explain the concept(s) in a way that you can understand them

I don't consider myself an expert on any subject. I do however appreciate that you are trying to "pay your respects" by complimenting me. I don't know much about you, but I do respect you trying to help in your replies to various posts.

Advocating any kind of modern tool to help philatelists is in my mind a very noble thing to do. I am a very non-competitive person and only wish to advance philately with my studies. I do appreciate your efforts with the 3d software, but cannot advocate it because scanned images are devoid of third axis/height data.

In the end, I appreciate you trying to find software to help philatelists in this computer dominated modern world. I find that your posts and replies can both evoke interesting discussion regardless of any intended drama.


Sincerely,
Ryan

Historical DNA Collector...That made my night...haha

Hey, I apologize for any negatives replies going towards any of my (our) American friends...I will try to be less of an *******...If you know what I mean...

Robert

Yes, my grape jelly comment was tongue in cheek. Thought it might give a chuckle.