usually 300x300 but 600x600 "OCR" mode is needed sometimes for tiny-type back covers to get 
recognized properly.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] create quality album cover photos


> On 11/02/2011, Tom Fine wrote:
>
>> I can't see how a camera would be faster, but whatever. By the time
>> you get a cover placed, the camera set up, the shot taken and the
>> image-editing done, I can't imagine it saves much time, for an
>> admittedly inferior image quality. The exception would be
>> 3-dimensional objects like some opera boxes or big 78 albums.
>> Especially in the case of 78 albums, very hard to get them to sit on a
>> scanner without doing damage. Same goes for some but not many
>> gatefolds. One place you might do much better with a camera is
>> shooting for deadwax scribe marks on an actual record, sometimes that
>> scans OK but often not. Better scans for stamped marks, it all depends
>> with hand-scribe marks, if they're deep and wide they scan fine, if
>> they're light and thin they don't, in my experience.
>>
>> The Epson unit I have does fine with any cover I've thrown at it so
>> far. Sometimes the widest side needs to be sure to be running
>> left-to-right on the glass, but usually the whole thing fits. I'm not
>> worried about absolute edge-to-edge anyway, most of the time the edges
>> are scuffed or cracked and get cropped anyway. Very few albums in my
>> collection have vital info going all the way to the edges, although
>> some definitely do as this is a distinct graphic style that was used
>> over the years.
>>
> What dpi are you scanning at?
>
>
>
>> I tried the camera mounted on a copy stand method, figured out things
>> like how to light it and how to set up tape marks so you could be
>> reasonably sure the alignment would be right from one cover to the
>> next and front to back, but the results were inferior to the scanner
>> and I found it quicker to just keep raising and lowering the scanner
>> lid. An old, old scanner would be so slow doing the scan that it would
>> consume too much time, but modern units are speedy. What's really
>> speedy is a large-scale pro-grade color copier/printer/scanner if you
>> are lucky enough to have access. We have a Ricoh unit at work that's
>> super-fast but alas its maximum height is 11.5 inches or so, width
>> goes out to about 18 inches but that height gets you in too many
>> cases.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Don Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 4:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] create quality album cover photos
>>
>>
>>> On 09/02/2011, Tom Fine wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Randal:
>>>
>>> This might be a perfect use for a Nikon DSLR with Nikon's
>>> remote-control software. Canon and others may now have similar
>>> systems, but I am only familiar with the Nikon. Basically, the Nkon
>>> camera becauses a USB capture device and the software controls
>>> camera
>>> parameters and can pull the image directly to the hard drive,
>>> directly
>>> into Photoshop with recent versions.
>>>
>>> That said, I've never tried it your way, I've always had very good
>>> results with a large-format scanner, late model Epson to be exact.
>>> My
>>> latest twist is to scan black and white back covers directly into
>>> Acrobat in OCR mode so that the text becomes searchable and
>>> exportable. It's not perfect but the results are legions better
>>> than
>>> they would have been a few years ago. I can't see how using a photo
>>> stand would get better or quicker results than a large-mode
>>> scanner.
>>> For the number of albums you're doing, surely there's budget for
>>> one
>>> of them. By the time you get set up to do the photo stand thing
>>> efficiently, you'll end up spending nearly as much for
>>> camera-control
>>> software, lighting, diffusion glass, etc.
>>>
>>> A camera will be much faster than a scanner, but lower in
>>> resolution.
>>>
>>> Are big enough scanners currently available? A 12" sleeve is wider
>>> than
>>> A3.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Randal Baier" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 4:44 PM
>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] create quality album cover photos
>>>
>>>
>>> I'd like to ask my esteemed colleagues how to get quality album
>>> images
>>> using a decent digital camera and a good copy stand.
>>>
>>> Our library archives is doing a digitization project involving the
>>> photographing of about 1200 albums, mostly 33 1/3 LPs, but some
>>> 78s.
>>> We're using a copy stand and plan to get a diffuser (or museum)
>>> glass
>>> so that the albums can be flat. We do have a light meter and a good
>>> digital camera, so really the preparation and proper workflow is
>>> what
>>> I'm interested in.
>>>
>>> We're hoping that image capture rather than scanning will get us
>>> better results.
>>>
>>> This is just a request for upfront advice so we can capture these
>>> images properly.
>>>
>>> I'm pretty impressed with the images on the Birka Jazz Archive
>>> site,
>>> for instance. We need to capture images in high res formats for
>>> both
>>> web display and projection.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Randal Baier
>>> Eastern Michigan University
>>> Regards
>>> -- 
>>> Don Cox
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
> Regards
> -- 
> Don Cox
> [log in to unmask]
>