Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing  (Read 5224 times)

Humblenubie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« on: November 29, 2008, 12:02:56 PM »

Hi friends,
Pls recall my query on Fine art file capture in this forum.
Receved many valuable advices, Thanks.
On my study I zeroed in on Canon EOS 50D with digic iv processor. But nobody advised this one, Why ? Budget alone ?

With a limited but stretched budget is the above best possible or simply the best (bekow SONY A900 & EOS-1Ds Mark II ) ?

These two Lense options are offered as bundles:Twin Lens Kit with Canon EF-S 18-55mm Lens OR with Sigma 18-200mm DC Lens #1.
Which is best ? Or any other ?
Pls remember: My purpose is digitizing oil paintings of sizes 4x4, even 6x4 feet sizes to edit in Photoshop and reprint same size on Epson 9880.
Thanks for the time in advance.
Logged

edwinb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
    • http://www.image2output.com
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2008, 01:39:30 PM »

Quote from: Humblenubie
Hi friends,
Pls recall my query on Fine art file capture in this forum.
Receved many valuable advices, Thanks.
On my study I zeroed in on Canon EOS 50D with digic iv processor. But nobody advised this one, Why ? Budget alone ?

With a limited but stretched budget is the above best possible or simply the best (bekow SONY A900 & EOS-1Ds Mark II ) ?

These two Lense options are offered as bundles:Twin Lens Kit with Canon EF-S 18-55mm Lens OR with Sigma 18-200mm DC Lens #1.
Which is best ? Or any other ?
Pls remember: My purpose is digitizing oil paintings of sizes 4x4, even 6x4 feet sizes to edit in Photoshop and reprint same size on Epson 9880.
Thanks for the time in advance.

Mamimum image resolution from this is 4752 x 3168 is for this cmos chip camera. 200 dpi is recommended minimum resolution for reproduction to pick up fine details. The maximum size this could reasonably reproduce is 4752/200 x 3168/200
= 24 x 16 inches. You can stretch the ccd chips a bit further but not much because of the better density range per pixel.
Edwin
« Last Edit: November 29, 2008, 01:40:42 PM by edwinb »
Logged
Edwin Blenkinsopp
Technical Manager
image2output
m:  +44 (0) 7836 674749
e: [email protected]
w: Sinar |  Foba |Inkjet

jasonrandolph

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 554
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterpunk
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2008, 07:33:33 PM »

If you want absolutely fine detail, you probably need better glass than a kit lens.  (Trust me, I know from personal experience.      )  It sounds from your description like you're going to be pushing the limits of your camera, so putting good glass on your camera body is even more critical.  Unfortunately, good lenses are usually more expensive than the body itself, so some compromises may need to be made.  At the very least, though, get yourself a good fast prime lens.  You would probably need something in the range of 35mm or shorter.  Hope this helps.

Geoff Wittig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2008, 07:33:49 PM »

Quote from: Humblenubie
Hi friends,
Pls recall my query on Fine art file capture in this forum.
Receved many valuable advices, Thanks.
On my study I zeroed in on Canon EOS 50D with digic iv processor. But nobody advised this one, Why ? Budget alone ?

With a limited but stretched budget is the above best possible or simply the best (bekow SONY A900 & EOS-1Ds Mark II ) ?

These two Lense options are offered as bundles:Twin Lens Kit with Canon EF-S 18-55mm Lens OR with Sigma 18-200mm DC Lens #1.
Which is best ? Or any other ?
Pls remember: My purpose is digitizing oil paintings of sizes 4x4, even 6x4 feet sizes to edit in Photoshop and reprint same size on Epson 9880.
Thanks for the time in advance.

Folks who do this kind of stuff for a living use far more elaborate set-ups. To really do a good job reproducing art at large sizes, you need either a large format (i.e. megabucks) scanner and the ability to lay the art on its bed, or a large format camera with high resolution scanning back and a perfectly even lighting set-up. You also need excellent color management, as in shooting a Gretag-McBeth color checker in the same light and matching colors later.

If you're going to attempt this with a D-SLR, you'll want the highest possible resolution and an excellent quality longer macro lens (100 - 180 mm) to minimize distortion. Tripod mounted, perfectly centered on the artwork, optimal aperture, and perfectly even lighting. You can squeeze out more resolution by stitching, but then you'll have to watch out for distortion again. Avoid kit zoom lenses like the plague for this; the distortion and vignetting will drive you crazy.
Logged

Bob Smith

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 83
    • http://www.accurateimage.org
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2008, 08:34:13 AM »

Quote from: Geoff Wittig
If you're going to attempt this with a D-SLR, you'll want the highest possible resolution and an excellent quality longer macro lens (100 - 180 mm) to minimize distortion. Tripod mounted, perfectly centered on the artwork, optimal aperture, and perfectly even lighting. You can squeeze out more resolution by stitching, but then you'll have to watch out for distortion again. Avoid kit zoom lenses like the plague for this; the distortion and vignetting will drive you crazy.

Very true.  I do a lot of this type of work with a 5D (Kodak 14n and 760 before that).  With current quality DSLRs the lens is way more important than the camera body choice.  The weak link in the setup proposed in this thread is the lens, not the body.  I use the Canon 180 macro for all but the really large pieces that I'm trying to capture in one shot.  Then I drop down to the 100mm macro.  The Canon 100mm macro is an excellent quality modestly priced lens.  I used the 200mm or 105mm Micro Nikkors on the Nikon bodied Kodaks.  I use carefully calibrated cross polarized lighting.  I output to Epsons... a 9600 and 9800.  The nature of the original piece has a lot to do with how large you can comfortably go with a single capture on such a rig.  I would take any posted specs about needing x amount of resolution for x size print with a huge grain of salt.  Sometime you need more... you can often use much less.  Correctly rendering a soft watercolor is far less demanding of your capture system's resolution than rendering a finely detailed pen and ink drawing.  There are a number of very simple stitching techniques that easily double or triple the effective resolution of your camera with little effort.  Much higher resolutions are possible without too much trouble but it is tedious.
Logged

edwinb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
    • http://www.image2output.com
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2008, 05:19:29 PM »

Quote from: Bob Smith
Very true.  I do a lot of this type of work with a 5D (Kodak 14n and 760 before that).  With current quality DSLRs the lens is way more important than the camera body choice.  The weak link in the setup proposed in this thread is the lens, not the body.  I use the Canon 180 macro for all but the really large pieces that I'm trying to capture in one shot.  Then I drop down to the 100mm macro.  The Canon 100mm macro is an excellent quality modestly priced lens.  I used the 200mm or 105mm Micro Nikkors on the Nikon bodied Kodaks.  I use carefully calibrated cross polarized lighting.  I output to Epsons... a 9600 and 9800.  The nature of the original piece has a lot to do with how large you can comfortably go with a single capture on such a rig.  I would take any posted specs about needing x amount of resolution for x size print with a huge grain of salt.  Sometime you need more... you can often use much less.  Correctly rendering a soft watercolor is far less demanding of your capture system's resolution than rendering a finely detailed pen and ink drawing.  There are a number of very simple stitching techniques that easily double or triple the effective resolution of your camera with little effort.  Much higher resolutions are possible without too much trouble but it is tedious.
Logged
Edwin Blenkinsopp
Technical Manager
image2output
m:  +44 (0) 7836 674749
e: [email protected]
w: Sinar |  Foba |Inkjet

edwinb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
    • http://www.image2output.com
Canon EOS 50D Digic iv for Fineart digitizing
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2008, 05:29:45 PM »

I have also used 12 pixels across a small letter 'e' as a guide to give accurate reproduction
but as you said oil paintings so twice the resolution of the smallest line pair you want to resolve might give you a better measurable guide for a particular subject

Edwin
« Last Edit: December 01, 2008, 05:30:19 PM by edwinb »
Logged
Edwin Blenkinsopp
Technical Manager
image2output
m:  +44 (0) 7836 674749
e: [email protected]
w: Sinar |  Foba |Inkjet
Pages: [1]   Go Up