Re: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
--- Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before getting the A50mm macro lens I just tried for fun scanning a silver pendant with the Canon 9900f flatbed scanner at 3200dpi. The size of the pendant measures only about 1 cm in diameter. I'm quite surprised how well that works compared to a close up photo. What do you think, crap or any useful? http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2968947 greetings Markus Scanners are very handy things. It's amazing what you can fit on them. http://pug.komkon.org/03feb/mxc.html Wendy
RE: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
Hi Wendy Do you happen to know what I was expecting before following your link: Some kind of scanned dog of course. But an MX is always nice... thanks Markus Scanners are very handy things. It's amazing what you can fit on them. http://pug.komkon.org/03feb/mxc.html Wendy
Re: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
I have used the scanner extensively to make ebay displays - though having the digicam has made me lazy about it... for shiney things I put them on a sheet of polarizing gel. I leave the top off for somethings and it makes a nice dark background and the subject seems to float. annsan wendy beard wrote: --- Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before getting the A50mm macro lens I just tried for fun scanning a silver pendant with the Canon 9900f flatbed scanner at 3200dpi. The size of the pendant measures only about 1 cm in diameter. I'm quite surprised how well that works compared to a close up photo. What do you think, crap or any useful? http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2968947 greetings Markus Scanners are very handy things. It's amazing what you can fit on them. http://pug.komkon.org/03feb/mxc.html Wendy
RE: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
Hi Rob I scanned it as a negative, so the backlit of the scanner was on. But taking photographs with a manual Pentax makes me feel a lot more like an artist ;-) I will soon try some of your and others tips with different (Ikea)light and without flash or with the soft ball at least greetings Markus Sometimes useful, however DOF is a constraint and not adjustable and unless you provide back illumination you always end up with pretty harsh shadows. At least rotate the objects such that the shadow appears at the bottom of the image, it will look a little more natural then. Rob Studdert
RE: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
Hi Bob yes ,I was quite surprised about the quality and will sometimes (ab)use the scanner if I need a picture of a flat thing quickly for a selling auction, because my cameras are analog and will be for the next time to come I'm still thinking about the reference thing, a coin is good but does not really match the clay figure theme for me. Maybe I find some other well known tool next time I inspect her working place ... greetings Markus Not a bad image for sale, but still needs a coin for reference.
Re: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
How about using a wedding band as a reference? Size will vary somewhat, but gross size is less variant than coins across borders. Regards, Bob S. On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:43:34 +0100, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Bob yes ,I was quite surprised about the quality and will sometimes (ab)use the scanner if I need a picture of a flat thing quickly for a selling auction, because my cameras are analog and will be for the next time to come I'm still thinking about the reference thing, a coin is good but does not really match the clay figure theme for me. Maybe I find some other well known tool next time I inspect her working place ... greetings Markus Not a bad image for sale, but still needs a coin for reference.
OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
Before getting the A50mm macro lens I just tried for fun scanning a silver pendant with the Canon 9900f flatbed scanner at 3200dpi. The size of the pendant measures only about 1 cm in diameter. I'm quite surprised how well that works compared to a close up photo. What do you think, crap or any useful? http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2968947 greetings Markus
Re: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
On 18 Dec 2004 at 23:40, Markus Maurer wrote: Before getting the A50mm macro lens I just tried for fun scanning a silver pendant with the Canon 9900f flatbed scanner at 3200dpi. The size of the pendant measures only about 1 cm in diameter. I'm quite surprised how well that works compared to a close up photo. What do you think, crap or any useful? Sometimes useful, however DOF is a constraint and not adjustable and unless you provide back illumination you always end up with pretty harsh shadows. At least rotate the objects such that the shadow appears at the bottom of the image, it will look a little more natural then. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT: scanning versus close up photographing !
Not a bad image for sale, but still needs a coin for reference. My son made/painted MEC Warriors and used the scanner for images. It is suprising how good they turn out. Regards, Bob S. On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:52:41 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 18 Dec 2004 at 23:40, Markus Maurer wrote: Before getting the A50mm macro lens I just tried for fun scanning a silver pendant with the Canon 9900f flatbed scanner at 3200dpi. The size of the pendant measures only about 1 cm in diameter. I'm quite surprised how well that works compared to a close up photo. What do you think, crap or any useful? Sometimes useful, however DOF is a constraint and not adjustable and unless you provide back illumination you always end up with pretty harsh shadows. At least rotate the objects such that the shadow appears at the bottom of the image, it will look a little more natural then. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
