David, Having had the experience of running a collection imaging studio which has operated in both analog and digital modes, I would be extremely leery of any set-up that did not have a human back-up. Certainly, you can set a copystand, lighting, etc., to scan a series of similar objects, such as Friedlander photographs or Sherrie Levine drawings. But no automatic system can deal with curling edges or cockling or some of the other issues that arise. I doubt any such system could tell whether the "tooth" of a surface demanded polarization. What about digital "spotting?" We've done a good part of our photography collection, and have decided to retain any "artifacts" that exist in the print, including hairs, dust, etc. introduced during the original printing process. How does an automatic system distinguish these from artifacts introduced during the scanning process? And finally, how does the work "materialize" in front of the system's lens? I would venture to say that it still has to be handled by a person. I, for one, feel strongly that, while such a system could increase productivity, it should never be left on its own, without a skilled photographer making the appropriate quality decisions.
Mikki Carpenter, MoMA Director of Imaging Services > -----Original Message----- > From: David Adams [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 4:42 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Digital back photography for works of art > > I would like to throw a question to those involved in the digitisation > of "works of art" (oil paintings, water colours, sketches etc). > > A number of museums, libraries and archives are using digital camera > backs on 4x5 cameras with success. Currently this appears to be an > acceptable 'modem operandi' for digital capture for works of art. > Another process is traditional photography and scanning colour > transparencies made from this process. (This is our process currently) > > Each method has a common thread - a skilled photographer behind the > lens. > > There now appears to be a range of digital technology solutions that > are very high resolution digital cameras with table and lighting and are > packaged as a complete digitisation solution. > > Examples of these coming thru' are: > Cruse scanners > http://www.crusedigital.com/scanners.html > Jumboscan > http://www.jumboscan.com/ > > My questions are; > > Are these appropriate for digitising "works of art"? > and are there any examples (exemplars) of their application in > capturing works of art? > Or are these only applicable to plans, maps rather than "works of > art". (I have seen sample scans from both and I can say one of the systems > can digitise plans very effectively, sharp, colour accurate, and hi > resolution - 270MB RGB 8bit file) > > > David Adams > Team Leader - Copying and Digital Services > National Library of New Zealand > ph +64 4 4743151 > fax +64 4 4743063 > [email protected] > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected]
