[Table of Contents] [Search]

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

Re: Scan or shoot photos

>a print is only as archival good as the paper it is printed on and laser toner
>is just melted plastic. Fiber based photographs are pretty archival

I guess I need to explain the situation more fully.  I plan to create a
book using capitol letters, frontispieces, and other designs drawn by an
artist who was working around 1914-38.  I need the work in digital form to
allow for proper reduction and to allow for a file that can be used for
cuts to be made in zinc.  Since the designs are only black and white or
occasionally black and red, I really don't need 4x5 transpariences or
photos that would only have to be re-scanned or reduced photographically by
the engraving co.  The museum director who has possesion of the works is
reluctant to have them scanned in favor of having them photographed on a
copy stand.  It seemed to me that a flat bed scanner would be less harmful
to the work and would be a benefit for cataloging, exchange of information,
scholaraship from a distance, so to speak. The costs of photography are a
consideration also, with the price quoted for 4x5's at $75.00 each.
So the question is really: Which is less harmful, the light from the
scanner or the bank of photofloods on a copy stand?
Thanks for the info. I have received, Charles

Charles D. Jones
and professor of art
Crazy Creek Press
Stephen F. Austin State Univ.
Box 13001 SFA sta
Nacogcoches, Tx. 75961

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