Prev: Shoddy finishes on Panasonic and Olympus micro 4/3rds cameras
Next: Pentax's new camera colours; excrement and vomit
From: mmyvusenet on 15 Feb 2010 10:42
Hello:

What kind of techniques are you using to take photos of books in close-up?

Yesterday I took this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4357519848/

Thanks for the technical comments about photography.

--
MMYV
http://www.mmyv.com


From: Draco on 15 Feb 2010 11:29
On Feb 15, 10:42 am, "mmyvusenet" <mmyvuse...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Hello:
>
> What kind of techniques are you using to take photos of books in close-up?
>
> Yesterday I took this photo:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4357519848/
>
> Thanks for the technical comments about photography.
>
> --
> MMYVhttp://www.mmyv.com

The image you made is okay for a documentation of the entire bible,
But not very good as to copy the page.

You need to be directly above the page and the camera to be level
with the page.
The page itself needs to be as flat as you can get it without
destroying the book.
The lighting should be from the side and above the surface of the
page. Two lights, one to each
side, at between 45 and 60 degrees above the page to insure even,
shadowless lighting.
You do not need to use flash as your subject isn't moving. So a
constant light source will
work okay for this type of photography. You do not need to capture the
page as if you
were reading it. You can turn the book and shot it sideways. This can
allow the book to
lay flatter and the lights not be blocked by the book.
Using a copy stand and a macro lens is the best way to copy pages.
You can
use any lens that would not distort the image, 50 mm or longer, a
tripod, and two
home reading lights.

Good luck and try all different ways of positions the book, lights and
camera to get
the image you want.

Draco
From: Tim Conway on 15 Feb 2010 11:39

"mmyvusenet" <mmyvusenet(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:7tt8dkFsbeU2(a)mid.individual.net...
> Hello:
>
> What kind of techniques are you using to take photos of books in close-up?
>
> Yesterday I took this photo:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4357519848/
>
> Thanks for the technical comments about photography.
>
MMYV, Don't pay any attention to the LOL troll. He gets off on tearing
people down and building himself up. Draco's advice is good for getting a
good photo of books.


From: tony cooper on 15 Feb 2010 11:41
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:29:41 -0800 (PST), Draco <JPDFDA(a)HOTMAIL.COM>
wrote:

>On Feb 15, 10:42�am, "mmyvusenet" <mmyvuse...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Hello:
>>
>> What kind of techniques are you using to take photos of books in close-up?
>>
>> Yesterday I took this photo:
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4357519848/
>>
>> Thanks for the technical comments about photography.
>>
>> --
>> MMYVhttp://www.mmyv.com
>
>The image you made is okay for a documentation of the entire bible,
>But not very good as to copy the page.

I had the impression that he was attempting to capture the book as a
subject of interest and not capturing the book to document or copy
pages.

Some books are interesting subjects because of the binding and general
interest of their appearance. In the case of the photo he's trying to
capture, the photographer should be closer to straight-on but still be
able to include the body of pages.

As usual with mm's photos, the background should be better. He
doesn't seem to have a sense of being able to "pose" his subject in
either an appropriate background or a neutral background. This book
would photograph better on a solid color cloth with, perhaps,
something like a chalice or a votive candle in the scene.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Charles on 15 Feb 2010 18:00

"mmyvusenet" <mmyvusenet(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:7tt8dkFsbeU2(a)mid.individual.net...
> Hello:
>
> What kind of techniques are you using to take photos of books in close-up?
>
> Yesterday I took this photo:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/4357519848/
>
> Thanks for the technical comments about photography.

It would seem that your agenda is not about photography.

Technical? It's a photograph. Decent. Could be better, could be worse.


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Shoddy finishes on Panasonic and Olympus micro 4/3rds cameras
Next: Pentax's new camera colours; excrement and vomit