 Timothy |
Photographing artwork digitally Hi I am an artist a painter and would like to be able to photograph my works digitally, for quick uploading to website etc. I want to get suggestions for which camera to buy, easy to use, hi resolution [`5-6mega pixels] any tips would be apprciated, also tips on photographing artwork, books, websites etc. Thanks, Tim [australia]
|
|
|
|
||
|
Dave Kone |
If you are uploading your pictures to the web, a 5-6 MP camera is overkill. Do you realize that pictures on the web are very small, even the highest quality web pictures are never going to compare to 5MP or 2MP for that matter. You can upload the full sized image out of the camera, but it will take a while for anyone to view even with DSL and cable modems. And if they are using dial up access you can forget them ever seeing the full size image out of the camera. Number of Pixels is irrelevant compared to the lighting, and your knowledge of taking pictures of your artwork. What are you really trying to accomplish here? David
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Yeah, you wouldn't need the most mega pixels for just doing pictures for the web, but I would say you need something with a hot shoe so you could use a couple of flashes. At least that what be how I would do it. But it also depends on how you want to do it. You could try using available light to copy your paintings, but that depends on where you are and how even the light looks, and also how simple you want to do it. But to copy something, having two flashes at obtuse angles so you don't get glare from them on the painting will make it clearer than available light. And if you have a hot shoe, you can use a sync cord for one flash and a slave for the other. I copied a couple of peoples advertising art work to make slides so they could show as a portfolio before, and used two strobes, each one set a little more than 45 degrees from the camera, placed equal distance. And I say hot shoe because not all cameras have a sync cord outlet. And you don't want to use an on camera flash to set off two slave units, because straight on flash will put a bright white spot in the center of the picture if you shoot something flat like one of your paintings.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Timothy |
Thanks for the info: why I thought a larger px camera is that [and I should have mentioned this..sorry] I also need to burn images to CD for promo use, and ofcourse sending pics to printers for invitations etc. as you can tell I am a complete novice at all this! could someone also explain something to me..printers [as in people with large printing presses!] require images scanned at 300dpi is this acheived through the camera, or is this image downloaded into say, PHOTOSHOP and 'turned into' a 300dpi image? I really don't get it. but want to!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Dave Kone |
Ok thats easy printer math. A 6.3 mega pixel camera like the 300d and 10d by canon have a total picture size of 3072x2048. 3027*2048=6,291,456 pixels. Now the print press want 300dpi, so 3027/300=10.24" and 2038/300=6.827 inches. So if the printed your file the could print a 10.24x6.827" photo @ 300dpi. In reality they could print it larger and still get decent quality. You are going to want a DSLR with off flash triggering system, or if your artwork is small enough use a light box.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Dave Kone |
correction to my last post replace 3027 with 3072. opps! David
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||