Digital Camera Versus Scanner for Art..

Artwoman · Joined: 13 Oct 2005 Posts: 153 Location: Melbourne

Dear Friends and Artists..

I was given as a present Olympus Digital Camera 7.1 megapixel..

I am just curious is it as good as my scanner for Art..

I like Scanning my art, as I do Comission work and I like to keep scanned images before I surender the work to a client..

I also Print these and keep in the folio for use as CV etc..

I noticed that when I take picture of Drawings, Paintings with the camera it is not as good as with my trusty scanner..

All advice will be aprecaeted..
Cheers from Artwoman and Cats.. Very Happy

belle · Joined: 01 Oct 2006 Posts: 1016 Location: Newcastle

If your work is small enough I'd go scanner. The camera tends to distort the shape and you have to photoshop it out. Also you can get a very high resolution for your initial image with a scanner. I have to use my camera a lot because I work big but by the time I cut out background and fix the shape it has lost a lot of its resolution.

gggraph

I'm with Belle on this- the scanner should give better results. It's actual resolution can be way higher than a camera, it's always in focus, and the lighting is always even.

For what it's worth, if you have to scan a larger work in sections, a useful trick is make a new file the right size for the entire work, then paste each section in and turn the layer mode to "Multiply". This should let you see where it aligns with the one underneath so you can accurately position it. Then turn the mode back to normal before you flatten everything.

Grant

The Pook · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 2904 Location: Tasmania

It depends on the medium and the size.

Artworks with shiny surfaces don't scan well and will be better taken with a camera on a tripod without a flash. It is not difficult removing any keystoning effect in photoshop with the perspective function. If you only want to use the pictures on a website or something a 7 megapixel camera should be adequate, but if you want to produce large prints you'd need a better one.

Small watercolours, pastels, matt acrylic or drawings, etc, on the other hand are better scanned.

Jayson · Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 8 Location: Sydney

Yes, Scanning does give a far better result when scanning artworks, There is a number of advantages over Photography, some being (Squareness to Camera, Lighting and the ability of the Focus)

I have to say I work for a company that has a scanner that is designed for scanning artwork and it can scan very large artworks (150cm x 220cm) and the resolution is amazing, all the fine detail is captured.

Shiny surfaces are a problem, but we have some cool filters that allow us to scan really shiny surfaces with ease. We sometimes have to scan paintings that are in frame and behind glass and still get great results.

if you would like to know more please take a look at http://www.cie-elle.com.au/

Artwoman, I hope this will answer your questions[/code]

smellypunks · Joined: 09 Aug 2009 Posts: 20

Scanner every time for me, if size permits, cameras work on 72dpi (most), scanners can scan up to 3000dpi or more these days. Not that you need any more than 600dpi tops.