Attached Link: NYtimes.com article

Thats what I call it (at least). I'm wondering if anyone has tried scanning an object with a regular scanner and getting good results. See above link, Its what got me to ask this question.

I have tried a few things. A good scanner can get better detail than any macro lense. I'll have to see if I have any files around. Fall leaves make good subjects. ;] Great link, thanks for sharing.

Here are some leaf scans. Nothing so intricate as what is on that other site, but it gives you the idea of the capabilities.

Here is a detail of the previous one.

I have found in jewelry photography that sometimes a scanner works quite well. Certainly, depth of field is a problem...but take a colourful stone like opal, scan the stone only...the paste into the jewelry item and you have a beautiful rendering. Or, for the stone itself, try the scanner...believe it or not, it works.  A local news paper ad lady uses a scanner for many of the images for ads  for the place I work.  It works for her and for the business owners.

I developed a cooperation with a fine man in Russia through a website where I take and answer questions about jewelry work..the on hands stuff.  We have commnicated for several years now and he is talented!   The image is Byzantine type chain he made, link by link.  Sure, the chain does not have much depth but the image is done by scanner!   Just one example.        

Thanks for this fine thread.      Your friend,     Tom.