Print

Print


At 08:57 AM 8/9/2003 +0200, Francesco Martinelli wrote:
>As far as I can see, these are A3 scanners, and will leave out a strip 1
>cm wide from any cover. You can adjust/compensate or just live with it,
>but I would not recommend them for archival work, as often some
>interesting info will fall exactly into that strip (series number, etc).
>35x35 cm scanners do exist for specialized markets but they are awfully
>big and expensive (I found them used to scan tile designs). At this point
>the digicam options (with the caveat about light and distortion) seems the
>most viable for me.
>Francesco

It seems that we're coming back to the suggestion I offered. In that case,
let me offer some detail.

The copy stands I'm familiar with tend to overkill for your needs; a
home-made rig is in fact quite simple since you do not need variation in
the layout. Were I doing it, I'd plan on four small strobes for consistency
of illumination and color temperature; the camera needs an external flash
sync or hot shoe. You do not need zoom on the camera and if your
requirement for resolution is reasonable, there are some excellent lenses
on inexpensive cameras with ~2 megapixels. Assuming a moderately priced
printer if you are going to paper or a usual computer monitor, that will be
ample. (Figure on 150 dpi for color printing and do the arithmetic
yourself. Of course, the pixel count for the monitor is easily estimated
from the display dimensions.) If you go the low-cost route, you may want to
put a supplemental lens on the camera (usually, it's in the mount on the
copy stand) so you can use the optimal focus of the lens.

I don't know what the market offers today; zoom lenses are the norm for
moderate-cost digicams and finding a non-zoom with moderate resolution, a
good lens and external sync may be impossible.


Mike
[log in to unmask]
http://www.mrichter.com/