[Taxacom] Digital herbarium

[Alan Franck]

We (USF) routinely use a DSLR camera for herbarium specimens. We use a high
F-number to keep bulky specimens in focus, a high ISO, and two diffused
flashes. Once setup (with the camera on a stand), the process is a breeze.

Alan Franck, Ph.D. candidate
Herbarium Assistant
Dept. of Cell Biology, Microbiology, and Molecular Biology
BSF 218
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida 33620-5150
1(813)974-7602

On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Sean Edwards <sean.r.edwards at btinternet.com
> wrote:

> Just a couple of points, mostly from a few years back when we considered
> this:
>
> 1. Problem with scanners is that it means either turning specimens
> upsidedown (bad thing), or buying an expensive upsidedown scanner. We made a
> transparent folder for turning specimens upside down, but handling and
> electrostatic problems caused more damage.
>
> 2. Problem with DSLR cameras is the usual:
> a. they need a copy stand to keep them square (no too much of a problem);
> b. even the best macro lenses will have optical faults (most now are very
> good, and things like lateral chromatic aberration can be routinely sorted
> afterwards);
> c. dust on sensor (standard DSLR problem even with self-cleaning sensors,
> just something you have to deal with);
> d. white balance, even lighting, etc. (no real problem, just be aware of it
> in your set-up -- four flash guns evenly cornered at good distance and 45
> deg, but just two at the ends works perfectly well).
>
> Maybe scanners have moved on recently?
>
> Sean
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Sean Edwards, email: sean.r.edwards at btinternet.com
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: Gurcharan Singh
>  To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>  Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 6:35 AM
>  Subject: [Taxacom] Digital herbarium
>
>
>  Dear members
>
>  For some time I was thinking of initiating a thread on digitising
> herbarium specimens, but was reluctant because whenever there is mention of
> digital herbarium, there is always mention of a scanner. I have worked with
> scanners (though not high end ones), but always find a good digital SLR
> camera giving very good results. I had started this with old photographs in
> our family albums, and when I thought of digitising my personal and College
> herbarium specimens, I found Digital SLR camera much more handy and useful.
> Today I got this encouragement from MBLWHOI Library Digital Herbarium.
>
>  "Specimens too bulky or fragile to be scanned will be photographed with a
> digital camera"
>
>  Personally I feel Digital SLR camera is much more useful, as it saves a
> lot of time as compared to a scanner. My question is if Digital SLR camera
> can give good results with fragile and bulky specimens, and is much more
> faster than a scanner, why not to use it in routine procedures.
>     May someone with good experience with both can give better opinion.
>
>
>  Dr. Gurcharan Singh
>  Associate Professor
>  SGTB Khalsa College
>  University of Delhi, Delhi
>  India
>  http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>



-- 
Alan Franck, Ph.D. candidate
Herbarium Assistant
Dept. of Cell Biology, Microbiology, and Molecular Biology
BSF 218
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida 33620-5150
1(813)974-7602