Need Help with Photography---Please Anyone

[Charles Lonewolf]

I have noticed that most everyone here takes really sharp, close-up, journal-quality photographs of artifacts. I grew up in a very poor family---what you might call grinding poverty. My parents never had a really good camera in the house. Although my parents are long dead and I am 59 years old, I can honestly say that I have never owned what you might call a "decent camera."

I am in a situation now where I need to be able to make super-sharp, close-up, professional quality photographs of lithic artifacts and other artifacts for publication in amateur and professional archaeology journals. The camera I need must be able to sharply capture all of the fine flaking details on the surfaces of the artifacts and clearly show the measurement tag with it.

Now here is the bad part. Although I am no longer poverty stricken, I do not want to pay an arm and leg for the camera I need. In other words, I do not feel that I can go to an exclusive camera store and drop $2000 - $5000 for a camera and other photography equipment. I am think something more in the range of the "upper end" cameras by Nikon and Canon that they sell on the shelf at places like Wal-Mart and Staples. These digital cameras tend to run about $300 - $600 each.

Now that you know what I want to do with a camera, can some of you real artifact photography hotshots (which seems to be most of you) please give me the specifications for a reasonably priced digital camera that would do the job for me? For example, what kind of zoom capability do I need, how many megapixels, etc. Please also be aware that I will pretty much a moron when it comes to doing photography, and I will be learning how to photograph artifacts with the new camera.

You can respond to me here or at my e-mail address: tcbkjbbrown@comcast.net. Thanks a lot to anyone willing to help!!!!

[Palmwood]

Charles, I used to be into photography 25 years ago and I haven't really kept up with what is what in the digital age. I will tell you my experience if it helps any. I bought a $100 Canon 8mp because it was the cheapest major brand I could find with a Macro function, for close up. It still doesn't really satisfy my need for good close up, but I use Paint to crop and create more "zoom". I am satisfied with the overall quality of the photos, and in the full pixel file as opposed to the re-sized version on here there is quite a lot of detail that can be viewed with Paint.

I think the lighting, set-up, and software that you use is more important than the camera, and that may take some experimentation.

One problem that I have, and I see in most digital artifact pictures is the lack of feel that you get for 3-dimension. And the stone often looks more coarse with choppy flaking than it does to the naked eye.

I hope for us both you get some good feedback on here, and I hope you will post some pics when you get them.

[jamiebenedickt]

Canon S100. Retails around $450. Its a no brainer top of the line point and shoot. No need to mess with lens changes. Can shoot in any mode. Including macro ect.... takes amazingling sharp images with high color resolution. And fits in your pocket. The next step up would be into a SLR where you would need to do a major learning curve both with the camera and on the computer. On that note these days there is some learning to do on the computer no matter what camera you get. So get yourself an easy program for your computer as well. Something like Adobe Photoshop elements or Apple Aperture. I shoot high end Canon stuff a 5DMK11 and about $10,000 in lenses and there are alot of times I wish I had that S100 in my pocket instead of lugging around 50lbs in gear and spending countless hours editing on the computer. Canon Digital Photography Forums - Powered by vBulletin Also get ahold of JIM BENNETT and pick his brain on lighting setups ect....He takes about the best photos out there of Artifacts. http://www.oldrelics.com/

[Indianasmith]

Actually, all my photos are done with a $79 Canon Powershot from Wal Mart, and it takes great, clear, crisp photos up close using only the AutoFocus function - a great little camera that won't bust your budget.

[Steve Valentine]

Charles, I use a Kodak Easy Share CD82 for all of my in situ pictures and fro a few of my close ups. I use a Nikon D50 for all of my close ups that I want to get a really good clear picture of. I paid right around $100 for the Kodak and I think around $500 for the Nikon, but I'm not sure on that price since we've had it for quite some time.

Both take good pictures, but of course the Nikon is much better then the Kodak. I can however get really nice close ups with the Kodak with the right lighting and just the right distance from the piece on the macro setting. I try to use indirect sunlight as much as possible for my close ups. Taking pieces outside on a sunny day and then photographing them in the shadows will almost always give me a very nice picture.

Here are a few examples. The first 3 were taken with the Nikon and the last 4 were taken with the Kodak and all in indirect sunlight.

[DesertWalker]

I have two el-cheapo FinePix A101 that take decent photos. I got one of them on eBay for $20. Tough and light to carry. Taking photos is somewhat of an art and lighting is a key to good pictures.
Make sure if you buy a used one, it has the card in it.

[rgs]

I've yet to replace my lost camera.

[Scotto]

Originally Posted by DesertWalker

Taking photos is somewhat of an art and lighting is a key to good pictures.
Make sure if you buy a used one, it has the card in it.

2 good points right there. And you carry extra cards with you, so if you fill one up, you pop in another one. I keep at least 2 of the 4-gig cards with me, EVERY pic I take I take with the best quality, never know when you need to blow something up or 'tweak' it.

Not everyone has to take professional photographs, if you are taking pics of artifacts for a book or something, you won't really have to have an "artist's slant" to the images, just clear, good quality images will work.

Here's a few pics I took with a $99 Walmart cheapie 5 MP digital:

[questor]

For what I think I know, I have only owned one type of digital camera. It is a Sony Cyber Shot. Seems to have enuff capability to do what needs done. But a multitude of other very capable options are out there without a doubt.

My current camera is at 8.1 mega pixels and 10X zoom. The more capability the better most likely. But can't speak from experience beyond this. But there are times I wish I had more capability. What I can say though for sure from experience regardless of capabilities is take alot of pictures. It is amazing how much a little tweaks worth of difference can make at times. Angles, distance, combos, lighting, etc, etc, it all makes a difference in the final outcome. Switch it up how ever many times you can envision it happening. It's nice to have choices for your final end product. Lighting is the other trump card. Switch that up too, to see varying degrees of success, or lack thereof. The more the merrier. Pick and choose from there for the best final outcome. The real beauty of digital in my opinion is the 'DELETE' option. Bingo, and its gone if you so choose.

My current Sony model is an eBay purchase. It is actually my second unit of the same old model version. My first one got stolen by some young dirtball punks. I looked into a recent updated model replacement and decided against it. The new models are so thin you can't even hardly hang onto it without it slipping out of your grip. The old models have some grippable meat to them and are fairly available on Ebay for @ $100.00 more or less. This is but just one option of many that are available to you these days.

Good luck with your final choice and purchase. The available digital options today should put you in a very good place regardless of your final choice as long as you opt for some upper end capabilities. Look forward to your posts after your digital camera purchase.

[aeolian]

Lonewolf,
I have been super pleased with my Sony dsc-hx9v $300. 16 meg 16X zoom hd panorama.
The biggest difference for this camera is the exmore technology that works in low light. I just posted some pictures in the insitu forum " twisted angustra" these are VGA 128kb photos shot up close with no flash in normal room lighting. This camera can shoot studio quality portraits or zoom in details at a great distance.

Good Luck
A M