The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of coating methods (plaster bandage, inelastic tape, and the alginate method) and an indirect method using a three dimensional (3D) whole body scanner. The surface area of geometric solids was measured five times using the three coating methods, and analyzed through 2D scanning and a planimeter. Second, to examine the accuracy of the alginate method more closely, the surface areas of boards with different surface properties at various inclines were measured and compared. Lastly, the surface area of a human arm was measured using the three coating methods and a 3D scanning method. The results are as follows: 1) The three coating methods were statistically valid and reliable for measuring the surface area of geometric solids. 2) The planimeter was rejected because the mean error was bigger than in 2D scanning. 3) The method showing the least error was the inelastic tape method, but that method was not recommended because it was too tiresome and laborious. 4) The greater the curvature and smaller the size of a geometric solid, the greater the error. 5) In measuring surface area using the alginate method, the objects that were smoother and had steeper angles showed a greater surface area: however, the mean error was less than 1%. 6) In measuring a human arm, the surface area obtained by 3D scanning was less than any other surface area obtained in the three coating methods, because the 3D scanner could not discern the armpit and fingers. In conclusion, the method using alginate was statistically valid and reliable in the measuring of surface area both of geometric solids and real human skin.