Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Photographing Stamps

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 1:27:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Hi,

I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative solutions
dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.

Thanks always,

Chris

More about : photographing stamps

Anonymous
July 27, 2005 3:17:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

"Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> writes:

> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative solutions
> dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.

Wouldn't a scanner do a better job?
--
David Dyer-Bennet
Recovering from server meltdown! Email and web service on www.dd-b.net
including all virtual domains (demesne.com, ellegon.com, dragaera.info,
mnstf.org, and many others) is rudimentary and intermittent.
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 4:48:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Forget about a camera.
Use your Flatbed Scanner at its highest OPTICAL resolution.
You can scan a whole bunch of stamps at once and get superb image quality.
I did that with a $20 bill and I could read the Microprinting!!!
Try it ....You will like it
Bob Williams

Chris Brooks wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative solutions
> dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>
> Thanks always,
>
> Chris
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 8:53:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I assume for now that you want to use a digital camera. Otherwise, look at
medium format for highest resolution and greatest dynamic range using
negative film.

If the stamps can safely be put through the scanner, a good quality scanner
is better than any digital camera. The problem is safe handling of precious
stamps. A DSLR with a good macro lens, such as the Nikon 60mm f/2.8D AF
Micro-Nikkor, will be less intrusive.

A good light source is mandatory. Some people like ringlights, such as the
Sigma EM-140 DG TTL Macro ringlight. - Unfortunately, the Nikon SB-29s does
not support i-TTL (just TTL). And again, Nikon seems to have fallen asleep
;-(

If you do not like the effect of the ringlight, you can also use two flash
systems using i-TTL with a light box. Illumination is tricky and you must
experiment.

The best background to use is a sheet of neutral gray poster board. Black
or white backgrounds are usually more difficult to get the exposure right.
Remember, digital has a limited dynamic range and you do not want to under-
or over-expose your background.

You should also buy a good frame for your camera with fine focusing rail
and, if you do not use a ringlight, good macro flash brackets (see Kirk
Enterprises for a good example).

If you use a suitable CCD camera, you may also want to experiment with UV
light. Be careful with your eyes. But you can get interesting markings out
of stamps that are no longer visible in visible light. The Nikon D70 and D2H
are suitable UV cameras.

You can find some good examples at www.pbase.com (e.g.
http://www.pbase.com/mansour_mouasher/stamps).

Gregor

"Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> wrote in message
news:11edvo8ki4g0g6b@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
> solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>
> Thanks always,
>
> Chris
>
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 2:13:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Scumbag wrote:
> If you're looking for better quality than you can get with a scanner, this
> would certainly involve a copy stand, macro, etc.
>
> Here's an example of a picture I took many years ago with a copy stand,
> flourescent lights as mentioned above, and a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 with extension
> tubes. I can't remember if this picture is 1:1, but I think it is.
>
> http://mysite.verizon.net/respitc1/photoalbum/


This is exactly the thing I'm trying to figure out. I photograph coins.
Have a look at the images in the URL above: your single coin itself is
wonderful. But on your circuit board, look how much less clearly R26
reads than R31. The macro setting focuses a very narrow field. So, one
coin, one stamp - great. Once you're taking 10 or 20 at once, how do
you get each one to be just as clear as the rest?

I don't know how many stamps the OP wants in each image, but this
points to something I'm trying to figure out. What it seems to me is
that the camera needs a wider aperture to get the larger surface area
into focus.

With that in mind, are digital cameras available that have manual
settings for projects like this -- to change aperture, shutter speed,
and focus, yet still be able to revert to automatic settings?

I think the images above highlight very well the problem with the macro
feature (and I in no way intend that as an insult; you just happened to
post a perfect example of something I am trying to figure my way
around).

Regarding a scanner - in my experience, no. The way the light moves
across the glass renders the lighting of the small, detailed image
uneven and not true to its real-life appearance. Again, its more
difficult with multiple, say stamps, than one, and while it may be
easier, the three-dimensional feel is lost, the sense of the
stamp-in-hand is just not there.
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 3:56:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Chris Brooks wrote:

> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
> solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.

If you invest in a macro lens for this, choose a longer focus one - eg,
105mm rather than 55mm. With such small items, that will allow you to stay
a little further back which will make lighting easier.

--
www.diverse-art.com
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 4:00:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

> "Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> writes:
>
>> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
>> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general
>> line out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
>> solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>
> Wouldn't a scanner do a better job?

Depends what kind of resolution/quality the OP wants. Photographing with a
decent macro lens will out-resolve most, if not all, mainstream scanners
(given that many of them achieve their claimed resolutions through
interpolation) and will also allow for more precisely focused images.

--
www.diverse-art.com
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 4:24:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

SCANNER SETTINGS: there are different filters for various objects ...
magazine or artwork as examples ... b/w

from scanner menu select "artwork 175dpi" ... fine for most needs and
not dense for the net.

professional archivists use 600-1200 dpi : only needed if
mega-enlargement is required later date ...
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 4:37:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

It probably depends on the scanner as well. I truly don't know about
scanning stamps, but with the two scanners I have, I can't get a proper
image of a coin (I agree w/your settings, btw). However, my father, who
is photography collector and dealer has an amazing scanner, images from
which he uses when travelling to show inventory he doesn't have with
him. Though you hadn't replied to me, I stand corrected; if a scanner
can accurately scan million $ photos, no doubt it can do a stamp.
Depends on the scanner, I guess.
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 6:37:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

What flatbed scanner are you talking about? The HP flatbed scanner I
have got does not get even close to a good macro shot using a
Micro-Nikkor lens. If he wants something better than a macro lens he
must use a slide scanner (such as the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 dpi 35mm
slide scanner). David Walker (Editor from Micscape Magazine, UK) used
it to scan microsope slides with excellent results (if interested see
http://www.microscopy-uk.net/mag/artmay05/dwminolta.htm...).

Gregor
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 6:48:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

The problem is only, his stamps are most likely not transparent :-(

Gregor
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 7:02:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Too bad. Maybe someone will come out with an episcopic illumination for
a "slide" scanner that allows people to scan non-transparent samples,
such as stamps and coins.

So, how good are the best flatbed scanners these days?

Gregor
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 7:20:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Correction: Ignore what I said about scanners. I thought about the
great resolution of slide scanners (not flatbed scanners). Of course,
stamps are not transparent ;-)

A flatbed scanner might do a decent job if one needs to scan a huge
amount of stamps in a short time.

Gregor
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 8:06:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Chris Brooks wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative solutions
> dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>
> Thanks always,
>
> Chris


What camera? For top-quality work, you will probably want a proper macro
lens, not a zoom-macro, as these might focus closely enough, but almost
invariably show curvature of field, meaning the stamp edges will not be
too sharp, and (usually) barrel distortion, bulging out the edges of the
stamps. If the stamps are loose some means of holding them flat, like a
small vacuum table would be needed. Some form of bilateral 45-degree
lighting is preferable to a ring flash, to avoid flare from smooth or
semi-glossy paper some stamps are printed on. A vertical column that
can carry the camera, like an adapted enlarger column, so the camera can
be raised or lowered to suit while maintaining verticality. A focusing
rack so the entire camera can be racked for fine focus would be nice, a
much easier method than lens focusing when you are at about 1:1 repro
ratio.

That'll do for starters.

Colin D.
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 8:16:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

"Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> wrote in message
news:11edvo8ki4g0g6b@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
> solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.

If you're looking for better quality than you can get with a scanner, this
would certainly involve a copy stand, macro, etc.

One easy way to get into macro is by using extension tubes and turning
around a lens, like a 50mm. Using a 50mm lens, it's possible to get a 1:1
ratio without too much extension. For flat work, you will need a copy stand
though, and some decent lights. One way to do it on the cheap is to buy a
couple of flourescent desk lamps and use daylight bulbs in them. You can
vary your lighting ratios by moving them closer or farther away.

If money is not an obstacle, but a good copy stand with good lights included
and a macro lens.

Here's an example of a picture I took many years ago with a copy stand,
flourescent lights as mentioned above, and a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 with extension
tubes. I can't remember if this picture is 1:1, but I think it is.

http://mysite.verizon.net/respitc1/photoalbum/
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 8:22:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

"Bob Williams" <mytbobnospam@cox.net> wrote in message
news:42E73C62.6000702@cox.net...
> Forget about a camera.
> Use your Flatbed Scanner at its highest OPTICAL resolution.
> You can scan a whole bunch of stamps at once and get superb image quality.
> I did that with a $20 bill and I could read the Microprinting!!!
> Try it ....You will like it
> Bob Williams

Most likely he has already tried the scanner route and is looking for
something better. A scanner will do a good job if your only objective is to
publish to the web or such, but if you're looking for something really high
quality that you can hang on your wall, you can do a much better job with a
camera. A scanner will always have a piece of glass between the CCD and the
subject which is not good for high resolution work. Another problem with a
scanner is you always have light coming from one direction. Believe it or
not, even a stamp is a 3 dimensional thing. You'll never be able to bring
out offset lighting sources and subtle shading effects with a scanner.
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 10:47:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Scumbag wrote:

> A scanner will do a good job if your only
> objective is to publish to the web or such, but if you're looking for
> something really high quality that you can hang on your wall, you can
> do a much better job with a camera. A scanner will always have a
> piece of glass between the CCD and the subject which is not good for
> high resolution work.

Are you implying that with a camera there is no glass beween the
subject and the CCD?

--
Hans (scratching his head)
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 11:19:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

"Hans S" <i.dont.want.spam@xs4all.invalid> wrote in message
news:42e7d6d1$0$11066$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
> Scumbag wrote:
>
>> A scanner will do a good job if your only
>> objective is to publish to the web or such, but if you're looking for
>> something really high quality that you can hang on your wall, you can
>> do a much better job with a camera. A scanner will always have a
>> piece of glass between the CCD and the subject which is not good for
>> high resolution work.
>
> Are you implying that with a camera there is no glass beween the
> subject and the CCD?

Yes, it's called a lens. The scanner has one also. The glass in the lenses
on both are not in the focal range. The glass on a flatbed scanner is. Big
difference.
Anonymous
July 27, 2005 11:25:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

On 27 Jul 2005 18:47:45 GMT, "Hans S"
<i.dont.want.spam@xs4all.invalid> wrote:

>Scumbag wrote:
>
>> A scanner will do a good job if your only
>> objective is to publish to the web or such, but if you're looking for
>> something really high quality that you can hang on your wall, you can
>> do a much better job with a camera. A scanner will always have a
>> piece of glass between the CCD and the subject which is not good for
>> high resolution work.
>
>Are you implying that with a camera there is no glass beween the
>subject and the CCD?

A pinhole camera perhaps? Hardly known for its quality though is it?

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 12:00:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

phos45 wrote:
> SCANNER SETTINGS: there are different filters for various objects ...
> magazine or artwork as examples ... b/w
>
> from scanner menu select "artwork 175dpi" ... fine for most needs and
> not dense for the net.
>
> professional archivists use 600-1200 dpi : only needed if
> mega-enlargement is required later date ...

Alas - that 175dpi setting will give him about a 150 pixel wide image of
the average postage stamp; I'd expect you wouldn't even start getting
the high resolution the OP was after with less than 2400~4800 optical
dpi.

Or a good DSLR.

Bob ^,,^
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 12:03:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Scumbag wrote:
> "Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> wrote in message
> news:11edvo8ki4g0g6b@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
>>resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
>>out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
>>solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>
>
> If you're looking for better quality than you can get with a scanner, this
> would certainly involve a copy stand, macro, etc.
>
> One easy way to get into macro is by using extension tubes and turning
> around a lens, like a 50mm. Using a 50mm lens, it's possible to get a 1:1
> ratio without too much extension. For flat work, you will need a copy stand
> though, and some decent lights. One way to do it on the cheap is to buy a
> couple of flourescent desk lamps and use daylight bulbs in them. You can
> vary your lighting ratios by moving them closer or farther away.
>
> If money is not an obstacle, but a good copy stand with good lights included
> and a macro lens.
>
> Here's an example of a picture I took many years ago with a copy stand,
> flourescent lights as mentioned above, and a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 with extension
> tubes. I can't remember if this picture is 1:1, but I think it is.
>
> http://mysite.verizon.net/respitc1/photoalbum/

What exactly is there? All I get is a empty page. And looking at the
page source, that is all that is there. Now, if I append index.html
onto the end of the URL, then I get something. Perhaps some config
file on the server has been messed up.

= Eric

= Eric
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 1:48:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

On 27 Jul 2005 14:37:37 -0700, Gregor.Overney@gmail.com wrote:

>What flatbed scanner are you talking about? The HP flatbed scanner I
>have got does not get even close to a good macro shot using a
>Micro-Nikkor lens. If he wants something better than a macro lens he
>must use a slide scanner (such as the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 dpi 35mm
>slide scanner). David Walker (Editor from Micscape Magazine, UK) used
>it to scan microsope slides with excellent results (if interested see
>http://www.microscopy-uk.net/mag/artmay05/dwminolta.htm...).

I doubt a scan of a back-lit stamp will look that good at any
resolution and certainly wouldn't be very useful.

Whatever method is used, it needs to be front-lit.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 1:48:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2005 14:37:37 -0700, Gregor.Overney@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> What flatbed scanner are you talking about? The HP flatbed scanner I
>> have got does not get even close to a good macro shot using a
>> Micro-Nikkor lens. If he wants something better than a macro lens he
>> must use a slide scanner (such as the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 dpi
>> 35mm slide scanner). David Walker (Editor from Micscape Magazine,
>> UK) used it to scan microsope slides with excellent results (if
>> interested see
>> http://www.microscopy-uk.net/mag/artmay05/dwminolta.htm...).
>
> I doubt a scan of a back-lit stamp will look that good at any
> resolution and certainly wouldn't be very useful.
>
> Whatever method is used, it needs to be front-lit.

Put the stamp in upside down! ;^)

Then you get to fish the stamp out of your film scanner's innards...
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 2:06:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

A good quality scanner should adjust it's whit ebalance on a calibration
strip in the unit before making a scan and the actual focal point should be
at the surface interface of the glass sheet, which should be opticaly clear.

I have a Microtek Scanner and a Epson Scanner. The Epson does good work, the
Microtek does great work.

I have cleaned the glass surfaces, inside and out about once a year. The
inside surface will fog with contaminents that get inside and interfere with
scanning.


rtt



I have scanned stamps and coins at 600 DPI and 1200DPI on the Microtek, the
results are marvelous.
"Peconic" <foundpoem@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122493039.099236.294620@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> It probably depends on the scanner as well. I truly don't know about
> scanning stamps, but with the two scanners I have, I can't get a proper
> image of a coin (I agree w/your settings, btw). However, my father, who
> is photography collector and dealer has an amazing scanner, images from
> which he uses when travelling to show inventory he doesn't have with
> him. Though you hadn't replied to me, I stand corrected; if a scanner
> can accurately scan million $ photos, no doubt it can do a stamp.
> Depends on the scanner, I guess.
>
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 7:08:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

One of the more difficult things to photograph is flat art and I would imagine
taking a picture of a stamp or stamps is much the same. What I've seen of this
operation invariably involves large format cameras (not digital) creating 4 x 5
negatives with a gray scale and color bar, 2 to 4 bright lights (balanced to
match the film) at proper angles to give even lighting. The lens is probably
long enough to minimize distortion, I use a 90 mm and own ones longer. The wider
angle ones cause distortion at close range and the long lenses minimize
distortion. Distortion is a problem with large flat things but not so much with
a stamp as the distance from the lens to the center is very close to the
distance from the lens to the edge or corner. By putting the subject in bright
light you can close down the aperture (22) and increase the depth of focus, in
other words the edges of the subject which are technically further away from the
lens than the center are within the focal length. Everything is done on a tripod
and easel. The mirror is flipped up before hand and the shutter is activated
with a cable or with the delay to minimize vibration. My digital camera has a
feature that balances the color for the lighting that I have set up, I shoot a
white board in the light that I'm going to place the art or stamps. With this my
camera balances (as best a digital can) the color. I set the camera on the
highest quality which is a TIFF at about 5 megabytes per picture. I use the
delay feature so I am hoping that the camera on the tripod is not vibrating from
my touching the release. My digital can fill the frame and focus quite easily on
a pack of matches so one stamp can be shot or an arrangement of a number of
them. My cheapo Umax scanner seems to be amazing in its resolution.
hth

Peconic wrote:

> Scumbag wrote:
> > If you're looking for better quality than you can get with a scanner, this
> > would certainly involve a copy stand, macro, etc.
> >
> > Here's an example of a picture I took many years ago with a copy stand,
> > flourescent lights as mentioned above, and a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 with extension
> > tubes. I can't remember if this picture is 1:1, but I think it is.
> >
> > http://mysite.verizon.net/respitc1/photoalbum/
>
> This is exactly the thing I'm trying to figure out. I photograph coins.
> Have a look at the images in the URL above: your single coin itself is
> wonderful. But on your circuit board, look how much less clearly R26
> reads than R31. The macro setting focuses a very narrow field. So, one
> coin, one stamp - great. Once you're taking 10 or 20 at once, how do
> you get each one to be just as clear as the rest?
>
> I don't know how many stamps the OP wants in each image, but this
> points to something I'm trying to figure out. What it seems to me is
> that the camera needs a wider aperture to get the larger surface area
> into focus.
>
> With that in mind, are digital cameras available that have manual
> settings for projects like this -- to change aperture, shutter speed,
> and focus, yet still be able to revert to automatic settings?
>
> I think the images above highlight very well the problem with the macro
> feature (and I in no way intend that as an insult; you just happened to
> post a perfect example of something I am trying to figure my way
> around).
>
> Regarding a scanner - in my experience, no. The way the light moves
> across the glass renders the lighting of the small, detailed image
> uneven and not true to its real-life appearance. Again, its more
> difficult with multiple, say stamps, than one, and while it may be
> easier, the three-dimensional feel is lost, the sense of the
> stamp-in-hand is just not there.
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 1:51:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Was this a US$20 ? Did you notice any changes due to anti-copying measures?
A lot of the notes here in Australia (plastic) have fine lines and close
colour shades that are meant to be difficult or impossible to copy accurately.
Also note that copying notes is in many countries illegal, so be discreet! :-)

Andrew

Bob Williams <mytbobnospam@cox.net> writes:

>Forget about a camera.
>Use your Flatbed Scanner at its highest OPTICAL resolution.
>You can scan a whole bunch of stamps at once and get superb image quality.
>I did that with a $20 bill and I could read the Microprinting!!!
>Try it ....You will like it
>Bob Williams

>Chris Brooks wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
>> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
>> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative solutions
>> dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>>
>> Thanks always,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 7:54:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Scumbag wrote:
>
> Another problem with a
> scanner is you always have light coming from one direction. Believe it or
> not, even a stamp is a 3 dimensional thing. You'll never be able to bring
> out offset lighting sources and subtle shading effects with a scanner.

This is right. The light source in most scanners illuminates the copy
only on one side at about a 45 deg. angle. Any surface texture in the
copy shows up in the scan as texture superimposed on the image, and is
practically impossible to remove. Anyone who has scanned stipple or
lustre-surfaced photographs, or coins etc. will have run into this
problem.

Some highly priced scanners do have dual lighting, but they're an arm
and a leg to buy. Macro shots with a good camera and 45 deg. opposed
lighting is the way to go.

Colin D.
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 7:54:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Colin D wrote:

>
> Scumbag wrote:
>
>> Another problem with a
>>scanner is you always have light coming from one direction. Believe it or
>>not, even a stamp is a 3 dimensional thing. You'll never be able to bring
>>out offset lighting sources and subtle shading effects with a scanner.
>
>
> This is right. The light source in most scanners illuminates the copy
> only on one side at about a 45 deg. angle. Any surface texture in the
> copy shows up in the scan as texture superimposed on the image, and is
> practically impossible to remove. Anyone who has scanned stipple or
> lustre-surfaced photographs, or coins etc. will have run into this
> problem.
>
> Some highly priced scanners do have dual lighting, but they're an arm
> and a leg to buy. Macro shots with a good camera and 45 deg. opposed
> lighting is the way to go.
>
> Colin D.

Hi...

Then we have to first decide... is the goal a picture of
a stamp, or a copy of the photo on the stamp ?

A stamp may have texture, a photograph doesn't.

Ken
July 29, 2005 2:49:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

There was an article in PCSG's newsletter "The Compulatelist" on using a
digital camera on photographing stamps. The link is
http://www.pcsg.org/e/content.php?article

Al

Eric Bustad wrote:
> Scumbag wrote:
>
>> "Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> wrote in message
>> news:11edvo8ki4g0g6b@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
>>> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general
>>> line out asking for advice - problems people have run into,
>>> innovative solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might
>>> have created.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you're looking for better quality than you can get with a scanner,
>> this would certainly involve a copy stand, macro, etc.
>>
>> One easy way to get into macro is by using extension tubes and turning
>> around a lens, like a 50mm. Using a 50mm lens, it's possible to get a
>> 1:1 ratio without too much extension. For flat work, you will need a
>> copy stand though, and some decent lights. One way to do it on the
>> cheap is to buy a couple of flourescent desk lamps and use daylight
>> bulbs in them. You can vary your lighting ratios by moving them
>> closer or farther away.
>>
>> If money is not an obstacle, but a good copy stand with good lights
>> included and a macro lens.
>>
>> Here's an example of a picture I took many years ago with a copy
>> stand, flourescent lights as mentioned above, and a Nikkor 50mm 1.4
>> with extension tubes. I can't remember if this picture is 1:1, but I
>> think it is.
>>
>> http://mysite.verizon.net/respitc1/photoalbum/
>
>
> What exactly is there? All I get is a empty page. And looking at the
> page source, that is all that is there. Now, if I append index.html
> onto the end of the URL, then I get something. Perhaps some config
> file on the server has been messed up.
>
> = Eric
>
> = Eric
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 8:09:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

I have done this successfully using a very low-tech setup. I take the tripod
that I have for my (non-digital) camera and insert the tube upside down, so
the camera hangs under the tripod. I use a macro lens with "close up" rings,
and I also use a simple level (small, maybe an inch across) to make sure
both the stamp surface and the camera are perfectly even. Then shoot away. I
usually put a sheet of good-quality glass over the stamp to make it
completely flat and a sheet of dark paper under the stamp so the perfs show.
The glass also enables me to work in natural light outdoors (on my porch
actually) without fear of the stamp blowing away. Keeping the camera and the
stamp in exactly parallel planes (with the level) is key to having the
entire stamp in focus and rectangular rather than skewed. I check both
surfaces with the level before each exposure.

Ada

"Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> wrote in message
news:11edvo8ki4g0g6b@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
> solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
>
> Thanks always,
>
> Chris
>
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 3:40:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

Ada Prill wrote:
>
> I have done this successfully using a very low-tech setup. I take the tripod
> that I have for my (non-digital) camera and insert the tube upside down, so
> the camera hangs under the tripod. I use a macro lens with "close up" rings,
> and I also use a simple level (small, maybe an inch across) to make sure
> both the stamp surface and the camera are perfectly even. Then shoot away. I
> usually put a sheet of good-quality glass over the stamp to make it
> completely flat and a sheet of dark paper under the stamp so the perfs show.
> The glass also enables me to work in natural light outdoors (on my porch
> actually) without fear of the stamp blowing away. Keeping the camera and the
> stamp in exactly parallel planes (with the level) is key to having the
> entire stamp in focus and rectangular rather than skewed. I check both
> surfaces with the level before each exposure.
>
> Ada
>
> "Chris Brooks" <cab938@delete.usask.ca> wrote in message
> news:11edvo8ki4g0g6b@corp.supernews.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm about to start a new project that involves taking relatively high
> > resolution macro shots of old stamps. Thought I would cast a general line
> > out asking for advice - problems people have run into, innovative
> > solutions dreamed up, and links to galleries anyone might have created.
> >
> > Thanks always,
> >
> > Chris
> >
How do you deal with reflections of the camera in the glass plate?

Colin D.
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 3:40:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss,rec.photo.digital,alt.photography (More info?)

"Colin D" <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:42EABE6D.E2C88CCA@killspam.127.0.0.1...

> How do you deal with reflections of the camera in the glass plate?

I don't normally work in direct sun, which may be why it has not been a
problem. I generally set up on a shady but bright part of the porch. And I
use an SLR, so would see any reflections before clicking the shutter (with a
cable release) if they were to appear. I don't know a lot of theory, just
what works for me.

Ada
Ada
!