Which digital cameras suggested below $500 for photographing flat maps?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Imaging Resource Discussion : One Thread

Primary use of my first digital camera (under $500) will be close-up photography of antique maps of various sizes for use on web site and e-mail. Rarely will print out. Need decent but not super resolution (people just need to see what maps look like, with some, but not fine, detail). Color, focus and framing accuracy will be important (will want to be sure entire map is in frame when photographed.) Using just plain old photos now (see web site at ) and they're inadequate.

-- preston figley (maps@americamaps.com), July 17, 2000

Answers

My question to you would be how large an area of map are you trying to capture with a single frame? Considering that a 3.3MP unit has only about 2048 x 1536 pixels, you're not going to be able to image an area any larger than 20.48 x 15.36" at about 100 pixels per inch in either direction. At 200PPI, which'd look better, you're only going to get an area of about 10.24" x 7.68" per frame.

What level of detail are you trying to communicate and wouldn't you be better off buying or renting a large scanner of some sort to image even large maps in one pass? Granted you could take multiple exposures and stitch them together to get a more detailed digital image. Is that what you have in mind?

-- Gerald M. Payne (gmp@surferz.net), July 17, 2000.


It's not just the quality you need which should determine your choice, but also the quantity. Are you talking about working with one or two maps per day, or might it be dozens?

My guess is that 100 pixels per inch of original will yield an acceptable level of detail, although Gerald is certainly right that 200 would give you an image that subjectively looks a lot better.

If you are working with only one map at a time, look into the various software packages which allow you to stitch images together. I haven't used them myself, but I imagine the originals have to be shot carefully to avoid distortion, and the stitching process might take a few minutes or longer, depending on the number of frames that tile the image.

If you're shooting so many maps that you wouldn't want to hand stitch them, and each frame will have to stand on its own, you better think in terms of the largest number of pixels you can afford.

If you're really limited to less than $500, I'd suggest the Toshiba PDR-M5, which is currently being closed out and is available (refurbished with 90 day warranty) for around $430. Check UBID and E-bay for it. Reasonable colors, fast, and includes zoom, which you will find useful. Not good with a flash, but you'll do best with good non-flash lighting anyway.

If you can afford $700, I'd suggest the PDR-M70, which is a 3-megapixel camera, and has 28% more pixels/linear inch than the 2 megapixel cameras. It's only available in new condition.

-- Mark Grebner (Mark@Grebner.com), July 18, 2000.


In what sense are 'plain old photos' inadequate? What improvement would a digital camera give you over your current setup?

You might consider a flat-bed scanner, which has some avantages (and disadvantages) for your needs.

-- Alan Gibson (Alan@snibgo.com), July 21, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ