Pictures or Scans??

[emilymomto3boys]

So what do you prefer? I have been toying with taking photos lately instead of scans.

Here's my thoughts:

I do love that with photos you can see more dimension than a scan. I also like that you can see glitter with a photo. And usually you can see more 'true' color, not what the scanner has chosen to show the color as, lol!

But, you have to get good lighting for a photo or it looks dark. I have yet to find the perfect spot for this.

So what are your thoughts and tips? Here's a card I did tonight scanned and the photo....I think if I had taken the pic during daylight hours I would have been able to get a better shot though.

[Jay Dub]

Funny you should mention this because I was just thinking about this myself. I scanned the sunflower card that I did for the OR/WA gathering and was so surprised that the yellows didn't look the same (and didn't match). So I took a photo and it showed the colors more clearly. Typically I scan cards and take photos of other things that are more 3D but I may be reconsidering this now. I do have problems with shadows on my photos sometimes though.

[J-Bo]

I sort of go between the two. I agree that taking a picture deffinatly produces a "better" outcome. But, I tend to do most of my stampin at night so my choices are to wait and photograph during the day or scan at "any" time. Scanning for me usually changes the colour and sometimes just doesn't scan well.

Great question Emily!

[Mahloumel]

I take digital photos, which usually turn out either too dark or overexposed, and then tweak them with Microsoft Office Picture Manager. It came free with Windows XP, and i need to use it to crop, resize and compress the pics anyhoo, so I am happy to adjust the brightness, contrast, and colour with it while I'm in there anyways. They have a lot of auto-adjust features that work all right too.

[emilymomto3boys]

ahh yes, but that would mean I knew how to use all this fancy photo software, lol! I have great programs, I just don't know how to use them.....I am a basic girl.

[suedstamper]

Well I have no tips but I have thoughts! I love the pictures taken with a digital camera rather than the scanner...mostly because I think you have a chance to showcase the card to really show it off. I do like the depth you can see with the camera pics...and I didn't realize the scanner could change some of the colors.

rohla's card is a perfect example of how you can really show off your card by putting it in the right environment (and I think it looks sooo professional)....I LOVE LOVE LOVE this card, and I'm sure the picture and setting has something to do with it:

Gallery at Splitcoaststampers

[SammyStamper]

I must be digital camera retarded because I can never get a decent photo of my cards. I stick with scanning when I remember before sealing the envelope. I love some of the photos, but I just can't make it look good. So I stick with scan.

[tashers]

I used to always scan my projects, but I was sick of the scanner distorting the colours. (It especially hated any form of green) So now I exclusively use my camera. I have a crazy bright light in my craft area that is at least 120 watts, so I always have good lighting for photographing.

In the past, I also noticed that most of the dirty dozen photographed their creations and how pleasing that looked, so I wanted to emulate that look. I find my eyes are also attracted to photographs with dimension, rather than a flat scan.

[stamps&cars]

I scan mine because if you can't take the picture with natural light, the colors are bad because of the incadescent (sp?) light or your flash bleaches it out. My scanner has a tendency of lightening the colors but I just darken it in Photo Shop back to the original colors.

[Happy Heart]

As soon as I can figure out what kind of cable I need in order to download the photos directly to the computer, I'll be using photos.
My scanner does a job on pinks and purples. I also think that a picture makes a card look more attractive, especially if it's arranged like a still life with other elements.

[lindylou1220]

Since it takes me 3x or more as long to scan (scanner issues with operator, I think), I definitely prefer photos!

[Wendybell]

I just decided (yesterday) I like photos better. The color gets so tweaked out on my scanner. You also mentioned the glitter and dimension . . . you totally lose that with a scanner. It's all about photos for me!!

[Sereikastamper]

I prefer the photos...even if they are dark because I can see soooo much more detail in the photo... One thing to do if you are taking pics and do not have enough natural light is to make sure you back drop your card or project with either a light color or a white background. Put on as many other lights in the room so that the rest of the room is well lit...that will allow your camera to not be trying to light the ENTIRE ROOM when all you want is the card to be well lit...if you have just a small point and shoot camera, try taping a small piece of white SC to the top of your camera and bend it around the edges where the flash is....that will make your flash a little more directed....and it will also make it more powerful....ok so you are thinking " MORE POWERFUL? It already bleaches my pictures!!!" Now here is the tip, stand further away and zoom in, OR stand further away and crop it in your photo editing software (if you know how to do that)

All in all the best light to take pics in is natural light but you know when you are up all night stamping....a girl has got to do what a girl has got to do!

[alcesalces]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindylou1220

Since it takes me 3x or more as long to scan (scanner issues with operator, I think), I definitely prefer photos!

I find it much easier to take photos of my cards. I don't think I'm as much scanner imapired as I have the uploading and formatting digital pictures down to a science because I have a daughter!

[Faereygirl]

I guess it would be easier to take photos....but...I'm lazy. I don't have anywhere that it just a nice neutral background to show off the photo, therefore, I would have to set something up, arrange the card, take the photo and then put it away. Yeah I know it would take like ten seconds....but I'm still lazy! ;) Although....I did take photos of my scrapbook pages because I didn't want to take them out of the sleeves (bad idea!) to scan them.

I need to stop being lazy and just take pictures. Maybe if I get the gumption to stamp again, I will do that. ;) They look nice. I need one of those standy thingies....

[emilymomto3boys]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stamps&cars

I scan mine because if you can't take the picture with natural light, the colors are bad because of the incadescent (sp?) light or your flash bleaches it out. My scanner has a tendency of lightening the colors but I just darken it in Photo Shop back to the original colors.

Well, I know the pic I attached here isn't the best, but I don't use a flash. I try to get the best light possible (Sereikastampers tip about the white background is a great one) and do it flash-less. It seems to bleach out the photo too much for me....partly this is being to close to it and partly this is because my camera has a crummy flash (one of the downsides of my particular model, but I wanted it's other features). I'll try to do another with more natural light this morning for comparison purposes.

[XcessStamps]

Photos all the way - just like the way they look. I take mine on top of my stove with the overhead light on. Works for me.

[JanTInk]

I do photos because I feel a scanner flattens out the card too much...here's my tips:

Use natural light, turn off your flash and use the macro setting on your camera if you've got one (that will turn the flash off automatically and zoom in close.)

I stage my photos near the largest window in the house. I try not to take them on cloudy days because less light means that the shutter is open longer, meaning that any camera shake will create out of focus photographs. A tripod is handy for reducing this problem.

I used to use a simple dinner napking for my background, but I am switching to using a piece of posterboard curved to be both the floor and background; I saw a photographers prop that was essentially a plastic sheet in a briefcase that created this line-free background for $200...posterboard is much cheaper and looks exactly the same.

After I take my photos, I open them in Adobe Photoshop. You don't have to be an expert to tweak your photos! All you need to do is use the Image menu and select "Adjust Auto-Levels". This takes the lightest value, makes the assumption that this is white and adjusts all the rest of the values from there. This really punches up the photo, making even a dingy photo sparkle. Every photo program will have something similar, so explore your software just a little bit!

This sometimes has the effect of taking the darker colors of cardstock and making them look black, however. So I adjust the brightness and contrast from the same menu; in Adobe you can see the result as you play with it and you can quit when you get it the way you want it.

[Leticia]

I'm glad my husband doesn't go on this website!! I just convinced him this weekend I needed a new 3 in 1 printer because my scanner bit the dust. I even showed him how bad my scans looked in my tiny gallery!!
Never thought to take a picture with my digital camera!!!
shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[Carol Lee]

I want to get a digital camera (am I the only one who doesn't have one?) Scanning my cards doesn't do them justice and they sometimes need all the help they can get. Colors aren't true-to-life and it doesn't pick up some colors at all. I hate scanning them in.

[Tah Dah!]

I prefer photos, too. I generally snap pictures right next to a window during the afternoon, and "stage" on a white sheet I've draped over a chair. It's not perfect, but it seems to give truer colors and at least a hint at the glitter, Pearl-Ex, etc.

[tashast]

Right now, I don't have a digital camera so scanning is the only way to go for me. It is on my Christmas list, though. I agree that I do like the dimension you can get from a photo but with some of the dark areas, I can't really see the details anyway. Did that make sense? I trying not to get caught online here at work. ;)

[vdoyle8]

[QUOTE
rohla's card is a perfect example of how you can really show off your card by putting it in the right environment (and I think it looks sooo professional)....I LOVE LOVE LOVE this card, and I'm sure the picture and setting has something to do with it:

Gallery at Splitcoaststampers[/QUOTE]


WOW! I totally see what you mean about the right environment - what a great shot of this card! It's a great card, no doubt about it, but it is also perfectly showcased. Very eyecatching!
Thanks for sharing this example. First of all, I will definitely CASE the card LOL! And you gave me some food for thought as I was thinking "I'm SO going to scan my cards because it's faster & easier." There is a card in my gallery that did NOT scan well .. I think I might take a photo and see if I like the results better.

[Suzyq01]

I don't have a choice - my scanner makes the cards look absolutely dreadful and I need all the help I can get! So, I take pics but I tend to play at night after work so lighting is definitely an issue.

[Julia S]

Oh I am sooo glad this has been addressed...I've been meaning to start a thread. I love the look of photos. That being said, it can take more time. For a great pic for the DD gallery sometimes it has taken more time to photograph than to make the card.:( All the above tips are fabulous and exactly what I would have said. I think it is all about practice. But whether you scan or take digital pics, a photo editting program is really a must have and doesn't take that long to learn. Adobe is awesome but I have Microsoft Picture It and that works really well too. One things I would like to mention, if you do take digital pics, please make sure that your project is in focus!!! I have seen a lot of great cards that are not in focus and it is really a shame! A

[Glittergal]

I've pretty much given up on the scanner because of all the issues you addressed (and I'll throw in how scanned "metalics" always turn out black - yuck!). Taking pictures, I've found, yields better results but does require perfect lighting, with natural sunlight being the best, and that can be a real hassle when we have a string of rainy days. Takes patience...sigh.

And Emily, trust me, I've very low-tech, but I learned how to use a simple photo editing program (came with the computer) in just a couple of hours, and if I can do you, YOU CAN, for sure! Give it a try - you'll love how you can crop, lighten/brighten, and make it look more like the real thing.

[emilymomto3boys]

ok, I can't edit to add this to the others, but this was with a bit more natural lighting.....you can see the sparkle this way. So as long as I stamp or take the pics in the first half of the day, the pics are definately better.

[Momofoneson]

Since my scanner no longer chooses to initialize, I have to take photos but any pearl-ex or glittery stuff, foils show up much better in a photo anyway.

[Jovi]

I scan mine, only because it�s quick and easy for me, I tried taking photos of my projects but I found it to be very time consuming� trying to find the right background, the lighting, the angle, I finally gave up!

I do prefer the look of photos! ;)

[stampininthesun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by XcessStamps

Photos all the way - just like the way they look. I take mine on top of my stove with the overhead light on. Works for me.

Good idea! I have had trouble with lighting and gace up putting anymore in my gallery. But. I will try the oven light.
Thanks!

[Jovi]

BTW Emily ~ great card ~ ;)

[cuccicoo1002]

I have always scanned my cards, but the more I see in the gallery, I'd like to start taking photots myself. Like other, the only real issue I have is that I stamp mainly at night, and don't get the opportunity to get the best light to take the picture. I guess I'll have to start a pile, and then photograph all of them together...

I do agree...I have a card in my gallery done with pearl ex and it doesn't even come close to how beautiful it is IRL. Too bad I already gave it away, so I could take a picture and see the difference...

[JWill795]

I always take photos of my cards. The best spot to take them is usually outside for me, and during the daylight. I don't seem to get the best color when I take the photos during the dark.

I could edit the photos in Photoshop...but I usually don't.

[stampintoo]

Emily, your card is pretty! Love the sparkle! I like the last pic best because it shows the sparkle and doesn't lose the background stamping.

I usually scan but I think I like the pics better. Some people make their pics look stunning with creative backgrounds and that adds to the art of it and is so cool. But I often finish a card right before heading out the door to an event or to race the mailman to the post or often just forget to save it for the ages. :-) Guess it'll depend on how much time I have - for me scanning is faster. But pictures can definitely look best if they're in focus and well lit.

[jtax]

I use my camera. Wish I was better at getting a great picture and then trying to adjust white/colors. Guess with time I will learn...

I have a scanner, but am scanner-challenged and have never been able to get a decent image of anything using it!

[JulieHRR]

I prefer camera shots over scans. Scans just look flat to my eye, and unappealing, but that's merely a personal preference.

I tend to take shots in good natural daylight, with a piece of pale toned, or white card stock underneath and propped behind. It helps reflect the light. Often times, however, I don't have "great" natural daylight. I live in a frequently grey and rainy climate. ;) So, I typically use a daylight lamp to illuminate my artwork. My camera is a Nikon CoolPix 3.1 MP, and I set it to macro and am typically about 12-18" away, depending on the angle, and what gives the best shot through the viewfinder. I also typically shoot multiple times from several angles so I can later pick the one that best showcases the project, just like professional photographers; I can rarely get it with just one shot. OK, more like never. Hah! :rolleyes:

After uploading the image to my computer, I use Adobe Photoshop Elements to crop out extraneous background, edit the shadows, brightness, contrast, and colors to best duplicate what the card looks like IRL. I also use it to apply a transparent watermark so that in the event my images are stolen online, the credit source is still on there. Step-by-step tutorials for creating watermarks with PE are online at About.com, so I won't bore with details here.

HTH,

[StampinSweetie]

I prefer pictures for all the above said reasons. If you're gonna the spend time to make a pretty & detailed card, might as well spend a little more time and effort to showcase your work in the best way possible!

[look-inkgood]

Look at this one by cindy_haffner! She uses the photo method. This one has a rainy windowpane behind her gorgeous floral card. What a stunning set-up! I think I'm going to start photographing and stop scanning.

Gallery at Splitcoaststampers

[Mahloumel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Heart

As soon as I can figure out what kind of cable I need in order to download the photos directly to the computer, I'll be using photos.

My advice would be to get a card reader of some sort to attach to your computer rather than hooking your camera up to your pooter. Uploading cards from your camera drains your battery really fast, and while it is easy to recharge it is still less convenient than just popping your memory card into a reader. My camera uses SD cards, and I picked up a cheapie little reader that plugs into a USB port for $17 CAD from Office Depot. IIRC I don't need a special driver with that reader, unlike with my camera, so you can upload pix to other computers than just your own if you want to.

[Happy Heart]

Thanks for the info, Mel! I'll look into that![IMG]//www.splitcoaststampers.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif[/IMG]