The widespread use of digital technology is transforming our everyday lives: computers and digital devices offer easier, faster, and more economical alternatives to conventional methods. In recent years, dentistry has made progress with the integration of CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) technology as well as many novel tools and methods. After CAD/CAM technology was introduced, it did not take long for dental applications to emerge. It was Dr. Francois Duret who created the first CAD/CAM restoration in 1983; he then demonstrated his system at the France Dental Association's international congress in 1985. At the Midwinter Meeting in 1989, Dr. Duret confected a crown in four hours live on stage [
1]. In the last few years, several intraoral scanning devices have been introduced in the field of dentistry [
2‐
10]. When it comes to implementing a system of direct digital workflow, a dentist must have access to an intraoral scanner [
4]. Digital impression taking has benefits such as reduced gag reflex potential, decreased working time, no potential deformation of impression material or expansion of gypsum, real-time visualization, and easy repeatability [
9,
11,
12]. However, intraoral scanning also has some limitations: some studies state that conventional impressions are a better solution for challenging prosthodontics (e.g. accuracy of long-span restorations on multiple implants) [
13‐
15], difficult bite registration (many systems do not support the registration of dynamic occlusion), scanning fees in closed systems (the user has to pay for performing the scanning data), and costs (intraoral scanning systems are still expensive) [
2]. Furthermore, these new methods have a learning curve: dentists are required to put in practice hours before they can use these devices effectively [
16]. Learning is defined as “an enduring change in behavior or in the capacity to behave in a given fashion resulting from practice or other forms of experience” [
17]. A learning curve is the representation of the rate of learning something over time or repeated instances in a visual form [
18]. Concerning the introduction of new technologies or techniques in general medicine, several studies have determined the learning curves of users [
19‐
21]. Intraoral scanning has been investigated in many studies compared with conventional impression taking [
22‐
27]. Previous studies in the field of digital dentistry focused on the accuracy and effectiveness of intraoral scanners [
3,
5,
6,
10,
11,
13,
14,
24] and the observations of well-trained dentists and dental students [
22,
25]; however, little data are available about the proficiency of the person who is scanning. Students preferred digital impression over the conventional impression technique. Older clinicians were less passionate about digital innovations in dentistry due to their personal history of having used a conventional method for impression taking with good results for a long time [
22,
25]. There have not been any standardized and randomized clinical studies assessing the learning curve of digital impression taking. For a practicing dentist, it is crucial to know the learning curve of taking digital impressions and the applicability of the scanner when considering investment in a new system. The learning process is represented by the reduction of the time required for taking digital impressions and the decrease in the number of images of the virtual model. The operation of intraoral scanner systems is based on optical scanning techniques (visible or amplified light beam). In our study, a Trios 3® (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) intraoral scanner was used, which employs a visible light beam for imaging and operates on the basis of real-time image capturing technology (ultrafast optical sectioning technique). The ultrafast optical sectioning technique utilizes up to 1000 3D images to create geometries from real data [
28]. Based on ultrafast optical sectioning, Trios 3® builds digital models by taking pictures and stitching them together. The first picture is used as a reference, and the others are connected to it with some overlap [
23,
29]. The larger the number of such overlaps, the more inaccurate the virtual model. We should, therefore, try to create as few images as possible to obtain the full digital impression without any missed areas.