EP Diary Forum

A camera is faster and easier, a scanner is better

Digital cameras come in a wide variety of price and quality levels, from US$500 to $US15,000. Anything in the US$1,000 range like the Canon, Apple QuickTake and Kodak ccd cameras is fine for web work. You don't need high resolution images to make a good looking page on a 72 dpi computer screen.

The problem, I've found, is not resolution but color quality. The dynamic range of the chips in these cameras can't reproduce the full depth of color in a complex photograph. In addition, the built-in compression of the images loses a little bit more color detail. And then the prep of the photo for the web page--compressing and optimizing the color palette--loses a little more. If you scan a picture without compression right into Photoshop, you have more of a chance to decide yourself how much quality you'll lose in the process.

In addition, standard film cameras have many different lighting and lens options. Most digital cameras are limited to just a few, so a complex composition is harder to capture.

For news, information and quick photography, I think digital cameras are best. But for catalogs, product shots, even important head shots, a slide or print scanned properly on a good quality scanner will deliver the better image.