Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_35a15b2b002005602323ec66ad46b9d024a8b2a62f2c99af, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Scanning/Photographing war badges - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
EpicArtifacts

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scanning/Photographing war badges

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    Scanning/Photographing war badges

    I would like to pick up on the thread I started on the ÜÜ Pab that shows the problem with scanning versus photographing war badges. Robert made a great point - scanners use harsh light to photograph documents. War badges are three-dimensional and you will often loose details in the recesses and have other minute details distorted. I will run a series of comparisons here.

    It looks better in the hands...is something you often here when someone posts a badge they have scanned. It is true! Look at the badges photographed below.

    First up the ÜÜ Pab:



    Last edited by Marc Garlasco; 09-10-2005, 08:57 AM.
    Tags: None
    #2
    Here is an HA PAB that shows how a scanner's harsh light distorts what we see:



    Comment

      #3
      Originally posted by Flak88
      War badges are three-dimensional and you will often loose details in the recesses and have other minute details distorted. I will run a series of comparisons here.
      Marc,
      To help you out, i'm posting 2 eagle details from the Flak badge. The top picture was taken by the digital camera, the bottom one is from scanner...Please note strong color differences...
      Last edited by robert60446; 04-07-2007, 06:30 AM.

      Comment

        #4
        Robert,
        Thanks - also note the EXTREME loss of detail in the lower image. Look at the feathers...
        Marc

        Comment

          #5
          Now for a hollow Buntmetal badge:



          Comment

            #6
            And the details:


            Comment

              #7
              My experience ... scanners make the nice bright reds / yellows more dull ... yet makes the whites etc. seem very much over exposed.

              Comment

                #8
                Originally posted by Flak88
                Robert,
                Thanks - also note the EXTREME loss of detail in the lower image. Look at the feathers...
                Marc
                Marc,
                The lack of details on the scanned image is from lack of adjustable depth of field feature on my scanner. From my understanding right now Epson is offering that option on their best scanner models. However, scanners still have to deal with unnatural light exposure. With 3D objects it is extremely difficult to capture the “real” look of the object because of the strong light reflections from the badges finish. In other words, scanners are cheating little bit. How many of us were very disappointed after receiving the badge in the mail and all we could say was: boy this badge was looking totally different on the pictures…

                Comment

                  #9
                  It is not that easy, guys. It ALL depends on the quality AND SETTINGS of the scanner and camera. A good scanner can produce an obverse or reverse image that 95% of all digital cameras can only dream of. Cameras are usually the best for angled shots of hinge and catch. If you are not talented and/or your equipment is crap, nothing will help you, no matter if your own a camera or a scanner.

                  A certain problem cameras have is that the angles of the photographs might be confusing and inaccurate. Look at Marc's photograph in post #1 of this thread, focus on the eagle's head. Can you see how it is tilted backwards? Check the scan to the left. It might have crappy colours and bad lighting, but that angle inaccuracy is something you will not encounter with a scanner. That is why obverses and reverses are best shot with a good scanner. Cameras put the "eye" in the center of the badge and the top and very bottom of the badge get slightly distorted with most cameras.
                  Cheers, Frank

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Frank Heukemes
                    Cameras put the "eye" in the center of the badge and the top and very bottom of the badge get slightly distorted with most cameras.
                    As you said Frank, it all depends on the camera model. With good digital cameras you can choose different focus points. Still the most important feature will be here depth of field settings. Of course angle is equally important to capture the perfect image, but with camera tripod it easily to achieve desire angle. But what really makes a difference between scanners and digital cameras is the light source used during image recording. Scanners are always using an artificial light source which could be very misleading especially for the true view of colors. With digital cameras you can always make a choice about the light source between “real” and the “other” light sources. I guess it all goes to the question: “with what I feel better recording images, scanner or digital camera?”. I know for sure that I will never trade my digital camera for scanner.

                    Comment

                      #11
                      The ability to change ASA and depth of field as well as actually move your subject and shoot from other angles gives the nod to cameras for me. Especially since you can dictate the light source. But scanners do a good job - though the photos of the PABs above show limitations of both.

                      Like Frank said, if you have no talent, stick to a scanner! That is why I love Robert's photos - great camera and he has a clue what he is doing!
                      Marc

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next

                      Users Viewing this Thread

                      Collapse

                      There is currently 1 user online. 0 members and 1 guests.

                      Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                      Working...
                      X