Photographing Art works
Jim Schmidt
so he could have the photos enlerged and give out as gifts.
I have a Canon Eos3 an assortment of lenses some cheap monolights.
What advice can you give as to how best do this. What lens? Lighting? etc.
Any comments would be appreciated. the paintings are approx 9x12 inches.
Tony Spadaro
and the ones I've read would be long out of print anyway. It takes a bit to
set up, but once the set-up is perfected you can put up a new work at any
time.
Oli paintings in particular have surface reflections that must be tamed.
This involves polarized light. The hows are much easier to explain by
diagramme than by text. This is also true of paintings under glass, and some
other types of media - certain pastels and, of course, acrylics.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"Jim Schmidt" <j...@en.com> wrote in message
news:3b588c84$0$11823$ac96...@news.raex.com...
John Emmons
lens.
Place the lights at an approximate 45 degree angle to the wall where
you hang the painting.
Center the painting in the viewfinder, making sure the camera is level
and the film plane is parallel with the surface of the painting.
I use a black fabric background, kills any stray light or
reflections, allows the frame to stand out. You can purchase Duvateen
or try Tuf-Flock to use as a background.
After you price out the polarising filters and the background material
and any other equipment you might have to purchase you'll appreciate
why it costs a few dollars to have art work photographed properly.
Almost forgot, if you're using tungsten lights use tungsten balanced
slide film, or you will also have to use a correction filter on the
lens.
John Emmons
"Jim Schmidt" <j...@en.com> wrote in message
news:3b588c84$0$11823$ac96...@news.raex.com...
John Emmons
As for lens choices, if you have a macro lens use it, if not, you
should seriously consider renting one.
If you own the Canon 28-105, don't use it, you will experience
pincushion distortion which is very noticeable when shooting
rectangular or square subjects. Barring the availibility of a macron
lens, use a fixed focal length lens if at all possible.
I also re-read your post and noticed that you mentioned having prints
made, if that's the case then use a good slow speed color neg film,
you should be able to get by without filtering it for color correction
but you will undoubtedly get some color shifts.
It is virtually impossible to photograph oil pigments and have them
record accurately using film, the dyes involved in the film emulsion
simply do not always record pigments the same way your eye does.
I've done quite a bit of artwork photography and whenever oil paints
are involved it's really a crapshoot. You will also have to contend
with a color printer trying to balance the color. It's tougher than
most people think.
John
"John Emmons" <JOHNCY...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:yU867.969$LP2.1...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Robert Monaghan
HTH bobm
--
* Robert Monaghan POB752182 Dallas Tx 75275-2182 rmon...@mail.smu.edu *
* Third Party 35mm Lenses: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/third/index.html *
* Medium Format Cameras: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/index.html megasite*
David Littlewood
<j...@en.com> writes
Amphoto 1992, ISBN 0-8174-4019-4, which is fairly comprehensive.
Also, Kodak Publication M-1 "Copying and Duplicating in Black & White
and Color" (no ISBN) has a chapter on copying artwork, and also is
invaluable if you wish to do any duping.
--
David Littlewood
Andy White
Schmidt" <j...@en.com> wrote:
Depends on how far away you can get from them. The best light is natural
light (in shade). You need the camera to be focused at the center of the
painting, and on a tripod. I would use either a 50mm lens, or a macro lens
in its no macro mode.
Retina
Andy White wrote:
Sorry, but the best light for shooting artwork, (paintings) is not
natural light. The advice that John Emmons gave is invaluable for a
beginner as anyone involved with this area will eventually use the
techniques he described.
Holvbphoto
Emmons" <JOHNCY...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>Re: Photographing Art works
When I first got in the business, some rich guy in Greenwich Village wanted me
to shoot his Paintings for insurance reasons.
Rich sure but he didn't want to pay, I didn't know want to change back then,
whats more I didn't know what I was doing, I shot by window light used 200
slide film, there was no 400 at that time (Mid-1970s), well I got away with it!
Vince
Check out my web-site
http://www.holvbphoto.com
You'll see some stars there
Andy White
<jhno...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Your wrong, I have shot art work in natural light many times
Bruce Murphy
And how do you deal with the (sometimes quickly) varying colour
characteristics of this natural light? Surely something which had
consistent colour rendition over time would make the reproduction
process orders of magnitude simpler?
B>
Jeff Novick
"Andy White" <is...@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:3b5a45eb$0$93671$272e...@news.execpc.com...
to be very helpful here and I've had lots of experience doing this. I'm a
photographer and I used to be an art dealer for many years. I shot all my
own things as well as artwork for clients. No one would use natural light
unless they had to. There are many, many reasons for this. In fact, I
don't know anyone who does it for a living that uses natural light. The
chances for color accuracy are small and that is reason enough not to use
natural light. With studio lights, you have infinite control. Just think
about it. But, maybe you don't have experience shooting in a studio
environment. How do you think all the art books are done?
Jeff
John Emmons
I beg to differ with you. "Natural light" by which you mean daylight
is seldom the best light to use for copying purposes. Particularly
open shade, the color temp is way cooler than the eye realises, this
results in color shifts that are much harder to correct for than
simple ones like tungsten/daylight.
If you have no other way to light the subject I suppose you do what
you can but I recall the original poster mentioning owning some studio
type lights.
These are far more favorable than daylight. Even if he has to filter
them.
John Emmons
"Andy White" <is...@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:3b598224$0$12822$272e...@news.execpc.com...
Jesse Houwing
>
>It is virtually impossible to photograph oil pigments and have them
>record accurately using film, the dyes involved in the film emulsion
>simply do not always record pigments the same way your eye does.
>I've done quite a bit of artwork photography and whenever oil paints
>are involved it's really a crapshoot. You will also have to contend
>with a color printer trying to balance the color. It's tougher than
>most people think.
>
strange colourshifts
But it is indeed a hassle to photograph art. As the artist in question
will allways exactly know what it SHOULD look like. As for the rest I
totally agree.
Also make sure that there are no Halogen or TL lights are on in the same
room, thay can give it even stranger colourshifts.
Jesse