On 2014-11-05 12:05 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>
> I wonder if it's possible to rig up a mechanism whereby a digital camera
> "flies" over large
> documents like posters or schematics and uses built-in panorama software
> to stitch the segments
> together? The segments should stitch easily due to rigging a mechanism
> where the camera is kept at a
> static height and static vertical angle to the document, moving on a
> controlled horizontal path.

Hi, Tom,

A friend (Christopher Campbell) has a camera stand in his basement that 
goes from floor to ceiling. He built it out of aluminum extrusions and 
stuff. He also uses four studio strobes and he found someone had 
carefully worked out the angles. He gets within less than a half stop 
difference in illumination.

 From what I read on the Nikon DSLR mailing list I'm on, it seems that 
the copying that the people there are doing is mostly done with vertical 
images and horizontal lens axis alignment.

They also do this with transparencies. I'm a lone voice there in favor 
of scanners. Throughput is the name of their game.

Current photo processing software (Lightroom and Photoshop are the two 
applications I use) have simple perspective correction. Leave enough 
"air" around the image if you're going to do that. Lightroom's is 
especially nice. I use it frequently to correct horizon lines.

As to your blurry photographs, there are image stabilization lenses. In 
fact the two lenses that cover almost all my shooting these days both 
employ that feature. My son Robert's new Samsung Galaxy S5 has image 
stabilization built into the phone--too rich for my blood, I think I'll 
get an S4 for half the price.

The book scanners that use two DSLRs seem to have all their geometry 
worked out.

Have you seen the page at AmericanRadioHistory.COM? I'm sending him Neil 
Muncy's old Allied Radio catalogs (he's paying shipping). There is also 
a site http://www.alliedcatalogs.com/catalogs_main.html

Anyway, David Gleason's page at ARH on scanners is
http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Scanning-for-American-Radio-History.htm

He discusses the Kodak (now Konica-Minolta, I think) 1200-series 
scanners, but his link is to the 3000 series, as are the images. He has 
a link to the book scanner he uses. If he can cut a book, the Kodak is 
his first choice. As an aside, I like my duplex Xerox/Visioneer page 
scanner.

I've always thought the nice thing about scanners is that they have most 
of the error-prone areas covered and can provide a good image with 
little work by an inexperienced operator. Photographing images requires 
more and higher-end input to set up.

Cheers,

Richard
-- 
Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.