On 10/26/2010 8:05 AM, Dot Porter wrote:

it might not be reasonable to try to have a professional set-up (with special book-cradle, special lighting, etc.).

I knew a guy in the 50s who schlepped that stuff all over Europe -- on the other hand, I have seen people with digital cameras simply taking snapshots.

I have taken several thousand photos of manuscripts over the years. Some institutions have a copy stand available for use, but I bring a lightweight tripod if they don't. One archive even had a pair of balanced lights, but most places where I have worked (in France and Belgium) won't let you add any light, so you are at the mercy of whatever you can get from a nearby window (if even that).

The job is most easily accomplished if you have a digital camera that you can operate remotely from your laptop (tethered operation). Someone here has reported that the Canon G11 has dropped that ability--that's really too bad. Canon used to provide that support for most of their cameras, and that would otherwise be a great camera for the job. Besides camera, tripod and laptop, I carry a pocket spirit level (to square the photographic plane with the tabletop), a grey scale, and a ruler for inclusion in each shot. I also have a sheet of white paper to place behind the folio being shot, so that if there are any holes in the folio, you don't see what's on the page beneath. Best color reproduction results come if you set a custom white balance. I always shoot in RAW and set the exposure for deep depth of field. We tend to think of the manuscript page as being a flat object, but my experience has been that most folios occupy the third dimension, often in ways that can be very difficult to reproduce. Therefore, I also take careful notes for each folio of things that might not render well in photographs--text lost in shreds, holes, creases, gutters, etc.

In 1993, I idealistically tried to invent the online manuscript image archive--originally as an ftp server, but as soon as there were web clients for PC and Mac, it migrated to the web (dscriptorium--currently off-line for server updating). I secured permission to distribute images from a number of libraries, but some of them refused to allow it. A large number of other on-line collections have appeared in the meantime--many of which (but not all) are operated by the institutions which own the manuscripts. Here's a list of some: http://manuscriptevidence.org/data/node/27. Even important libraries have extreme diversity in the quality of images that they put up.

Jesse

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:05 AM, Dot Porter dot.porter@gmail.com wrote:

Hello list,

Are there any best practices aimed at scholars who wish to take images of manuscripts "in the field", using their own equipment? I'm thinking particularly of very remote repositories, that would not have their own digitization equipment; for a scholar interested in imaging only one or two manuscripts it might not be reasonable to try to have a professional set-up (with special book-cradle, special lighting, etc.). However even in those circumstances it's important to maintain high quality both in imaging and in metadata. I know for a fact that there are people doing work like that, hopefully some of them are on this list. Has anyone actually taken the time to write up best practices, though?

And if not, perhaps we need some.

Thanks, Dot