The Fujifilm FinePix S8000fd does have some issues with purple fringing (see http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms8000fd/page5.asp for samples). In your image Astenophylla1-02710.jpg it is quite visible at the edge of the paper and around the bold letters in the bottom right corner.
The sensor of the camera is 1/2.35", 8MP. That is not a large sensor, but as you control the lightning, it should not matter all that much. Still, I must say that I found your image somewhat blurry, especially the flowers. Should I guess, I'd say that you positioned the camera a bit too close to the subject and did not use the macro function? If not, you should definitely try and test with another camera.
Another worrying issue is that the image appears to be very noisy in the blue channel. So much that it is visible to the naked eye when viewed on the screen 1:1. If you used normal household light bulbs for the lightning, that could be the answer as the camera has to boost the blue channel to compensate for the warm light.
I realize that your test-image is probably just a quick shot to see if the camera is usable for the task. However, in order to make a proper judgment you'll have to get a bit closer to expected shooting conditions. From the sample image itself, I'd say that you could do a lot better with either another (cheap) camera or better shooting conditions, depending on where the problem lies.
I wholly agree with Andrew that a camera with RAW and/or TIFF support would be preferable, especially if you're planning on using TIFF as the archival format anyway. You could buy a Canon PowerShot SD990, install CHDK (http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/IXUS980IS) and get 14MP in RAW format for $430 (not a serious suggestion), but for quality the obvious choice is a DSLR. Better to have 8MP of high quality than 14MP of fairly okay.
NB: When inspecting the EXIF metadata, I noticed that PhotoShop has been involved in the workflow. The file size is also curiously large for a JPEG produced by a camera. Is the JPEG re-compressed? That makes it harder to judge image quality.
Regards,
Toke Eskildsen (Point'n'shoot camera user)
________________________________________
From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Deng, Sai [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 18 June 2009 16:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CODE4LIB] Digital imaging questions
Hi, list,
A while ago, I read some interesting discussion on how to use camera to produce archival-quality images from this list. Now, I have some imaging questions and I think this might be a good list to turn to. Thank you in advance! We are trying to add some herbarium images to our DSpace. The specimen pictures will be taken at the Biology department and the library is responsible for depositing the images and transferring/mapping/adding metadata. On the testing stage, they use Fujifilm FinePix S8000fd digital camera
(http://www.fujifilmusa.com/support/ServiceSupportSoftwareContent.do?dbid=874716&prodcat=871639&sscucatid=664260). It produces 8 megapixel images, and it doesn't have raw/tiff support. It seems that it cannot produce archival quality images. Before we persuade the Biology department to switch their camera, I want to make sure it is absolutely necessary. The pictures they took look fine with human eyes, see an example at: http://library.wichita.edu/techserv/test/herbarium/Astenophylla1-02710.jpg
In order to make master images from a camera, it should be capable of producing raw or tiff images with 12 or above megapixels?
A related archiving question, the biology field standard is DarwinCore, however, DSpace doesn't support it. The Biology Dept. already has some data in spreadsheet. In this case, when it is impossible to map all the elements to Dublin Core, is it a good practice for us to set up several local elements mapped from DarwinCore?
Thanks a million,
Sai
Sai Deng
Metadata Catalog Librarian
Wichita State University Libraries
1845 Fairmount
Wichita, KS 67260-0068
Phone: (316) 978-5138
Fax: (316) 978-3048
Email: [log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
|
