[Table of Contents] [Search]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Scan or shoot photos

In regard to digital cameras:

My experience with these has been that while they are fun to use and great
for recording things that can be transferred immediately to a computer, the
quality of the pictures isn't up to printing. Basically, they don't capture
enough information and the images can be too pixelated to be of  use for
anything requiring great detail. I like them for certain work I use on a
web page or work to be incorporated into a Photoshop or Illustrator image,
but aside from that, if quality of the image alone is paramount, I wouldn't
resort to a digital camera (unless I had a few thousand to spend on a
really great digital camera).
        On the plus side, over the past two years, prices have dropped and
the quality has improved. For around $700, you can get a pretty good
camera, that, while quite good, still isn't for the detailed photographing
of artwork.
        As far as brands go, I like the Canon cameras.

And in regard to scanning of images vs. copying...do you mean a regular
copier machine?

Scanning is really a very different alternative, since it would capture
better detail, and enable you to archive your work, not just by virtue that
you made a copy to print out, but that you have made something that can be
stored on disk...the color can be corrected to get a truer rendition of the
work (as opposed to dealing with what random result comes out of a copier)
and the resulting scan can be printed out a number of ways (iris, dye-sub,
fiery, etc.) and be resized, resused, put onto a web page, converted to
black and white, a duotone...
        I would go for the scanning given the opportunity and the choice.

hope this helps those asking.


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]