How To Photograph Artwork

4artsake

I am an artist. I have a website on smugmug. I am going pro in fall 2009. I have a lot of artwork to photograph and would like some professional advice and suggestions. I plan on renting a professional camera to do these shots, I just don't know which one. I do know that I don't need a full frame camera, please correct me if I am wrong. All of my art ranges from black and white graphite/charcoal artwork to soft and subtle pastel portraits to full color oil and acrylic paintings.

Here is an example of a graphite portrait that is almost done. I hope I attached the pic properly. I took a test shot with a basic point and shoot camera and can see that I lost a lot of detail and subtle gray tones. I also am wondering what kind of lighting I should use? Natural daylight or artificial? Any help is appreciated.

Tiziano

I shoot lots of artwork, ranging from oil and watercolor paintings to pencil and charcoal drawings. Most of the shots end up in art books and/or web and video.

-No, a FF cam is not necessary unless you want large prints. Even then, some might debate it's necessity.
-IMO, even lighting is paramount.
-If the work is small enough one could use a copystand, otherwise use a tripod.
-If you're renting a cam, make sure that it shoots in RAW.
-I mostly use both my Sigma 28mm and 50mm for artwork shots. Now and then I'll switch to my macro but rarely.
-Also, if you're still a student, pick up an academic version of Lightroom 2. It will greatly assist you in adjusting your RAW's after your shoot.

Very nice drawing BTW. I didn't know Pratt taught realism anymore.

pathfinder

Margaret, Welcome to dgrin.

I think you first need a good tripod or copy stand, depending on whether your prints are to be shot on a wall ( vertical ) or a table ( flat ) and some stable, color consistent lighting, whether flash or continuous. Might even be cool fluorescent, if color balanced, like a pair of Ott lights. A cable release would be nice, and is pretty cheap for the quality it will gain you.

You need a tool for a custom white balance ( at least that would be my recommendation. ) This could be an Expodisc, a SpectraSnap filter, or one of the white balance cards like the WhiBal or the BalanceSmarter reflector. A custom white balance will insure that the images you capture are an accurate rendition of your images. A custom white balance will allow you to shoot jpgs and save a lot of image editing time as well.

As for cameras and lenses, for images for the web, I would think a good P&S like a Canon G10 would work just fine. The camera should shoot in Manual Mode, accept flash connections, and allow a custom white balance. A G10 will do all these and shoot in RAW as well.

If you want a DSLR almost all of them will work. A nice 50mm macro lens will give you a lens that is sharp in the corners with a flat field for printed work, and is relatively cheap. The Canon 50mm macro f2.5 is a nice piece of glass for the price.

If you have any more questions I will be happy to try to answer them, and I am sure we have other readers who will offer suggestions or corrections to my suggestions as well

Tiziano

As long as the cam has a timer then I don't think a cable release matters. I have Nikon's infarred remote for my D90 but find that I use the timer fully 95% of the, well, time.

Good lighting suggestions although I find that lately I'm using more and more natural daylight from my north facing skylight. Again, for me the difficulty is even lighting more than lighting temp. Given that the shown drawing is on white paper, white balance should not be a problem.

Back in the day (film) I only used Tungsten slide film and matching lights.

I also use a small level set on the cam to help line things up.

Also, in reading through a book on my cam (Nikon D90) I came across the suggestion to switch it's default color mode from sRGB to Adobe RGB. So far I like the change.

-Make sure your monitor is calibrated.
-If you're shooting for the web and are on a Mac, don't forget that the images may appear darker on Windows machines. You may need to pump up the gamma a bit.
-I bracket my shots, starting with f1.8 or f2 and go up to f2.8. The shutter speed is constant at 25. ISO is 200. I also both manually focus and use auto. Occasionally I'll go into Nikon's LiveView to help with my focus. In fact it's one of the reasons I bought the camera.
-When editing in LR I always make virtual copies for different adjustment paths.

Also, IMO the best shot will often be a scan from a drum scanner directly from the artwork.

Qarik

I am going with pathfinder...a DSLR is not needed..but if you are going to invest in a camera then get one. How big are your drawings? Unless they very large and very detailed then you don't need a full frame at all.

Any of the low end canon or nikons will do just fine for the body. Then stick a 35mm or 50mm on it (the 50mm is closest to what our natural eye views things). Tripod.

As far as lighting goes? I would think a large enough light box that fits your artwork would be perfect.

Nikolai

I'm afraid I'm gonna sound like a copycat, but the main things are
1) good lighting (this can be difficult and expensive)
2) raw
3) glass sharp corner to corner
HTH

pathfinder

I agree with Nik.

If I was a struggling artist, I think I would try to use 2 - 4 Ott lights for lighting if I could not use daylight. You want the lighting even all the way across the artwork. Ott lights are what I use in my print viewing station at home.

There are other full spectrum lights out there as well - http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/compare_bluemax.htm?sc_cid=169&s_kwcid=ott%20light%7C3179791038&gclid=CNSR2N6175kCFWVM5QodtGBOQw

A good 50mm macro should be sharp across the entire field, and be better in the corners than most standard 50mm lenses. But then again, most better point and shoots should have very good depth of field as well. A G10 has 14 Mpxls - that should be enough for the web for sure.

4artsake

First, I'd like to thank those who've already responded to my question. I guess I should delete the Pratt Institute under my icon. It may be sending the wrong message. I am not a student anymore but a working professional with my own business. I am a graduate of Pratt Institute though with a B.A in Graphic Design. Sorry for the mix up.

These photographs are to show my future website visitors my artistic abilities as a portraiture artist. I have my own business creating portraiture art in real life and from peoples photographs. Before deciding to design a website here at smugmug, I use to make appointments and show my artwork in a portfolio case to my potential client in person. I have never lost a job this way because seeing the artwork live is so much more powerful than a photograph, I think. As you know, first impression is very important to getting that next assignment.

I have done very well with little advertisement and getting most of my jobs by referral. But, I want to reach more people, that is why I am here at smugmug. I am determined to try to produce that same effect of seeing the artwork in real life with photography for my website. So, it is important to me that my artwork stays true to what it looks like in real life when it is being viewed by a visitor. The photography needs to be colorful and detailed.

Anyway, with all that said...

The artwork size ranges from 5X7 to 24X36 and are very detailed work of people, children and pets in graphite, charcoal, pastels, oil pastels, acrylic paints and oils. The image I attched of the unfinished portrait of the boy and the little dog was taken with a Canon PowerShot SD850 IS Digital Elph camera. I am so disappointed with it. The portrait is a 100 times better in real life and that attached photo is nothing compared to what a client would see at one of my live quote appointments.

I hope this gives everyone a better idea of what my goals are. And thanks again for your help.

Nikolai

Margaret, you may want to consider Zoomify or a similar product which would allow you shot the finest details on the web but would prevent stealing. Of course, you will also need a decent camera and some working knwoledge of post processing (in addition to what has been suggested already) to achieve what you want.

pathfinder

Margaret,

I never assume to know the level of sophistication or financial ability of folks who ask questions here, so if I caused you to think that I believed you were a starving student with my comment about a struggling student, I do apologize. I just get folks who complain because of the expence of some professional level equipment - whether lights, cameras, or copy stands.

Since I now know your skill levels and needs better, I think my answers still stand. I do shoot with a G10 as well as a 5D and a 5DMkII and a 1DsMkII so I know the potential of these cameras well.

Properly used, any of these should provide satisfactory images for web display, despite your experience with your small camera.

I think the real trick is good lighting, custom white balancing, good tripod fixation, and decent glass.

If you feel a DSLR will do better, by all means get the best you can afford, but I am pretty sure that a properly captured image with a G10 will be a very nice likeness for a web image.

If your goal is a large 20 x 30 inch print, then a full frame DSLR is a better choice and what I would use.

4artsake

Hi Pathfinder,

No apologies needed. It was "my bad". I didn't mean to make you feel that maybe an apology was in order. I added the late info because I felt that I made a mistake by not communicating who I was and where I was coming from at the beginning of this thread before asking for all of your help. It was not directed toward or in response to anyone. After the fact, I realized it was irresponsible of me to assume that you guys could give me proper advice without knowing my level of experience and level of understanding. Again, definitely my bad.

I am very happy so far with the suggestions I am getting and plan to wait a while to see what other suggestions come in and then go from there. I am very happy with smugmug so far and look forward to seeing what a website can do for me as far as generating more business. I would love to get an assignment from someone in New York City or else where. I work the Chicagoland area. I won't be using your great printing services unfortunately when I go pro, I am here because I liked the fact that smugmug gives me the option to design a site using CSS, a professional web address and photo protection. I will however, be looking into Zoomify as Nikolai suggested.

I can't purchase my dream camera, a 5DMkII right now, but I can rent the cameras being suggested and I can purchase some smaller items like lighting, etc. for these shots. So, any suggestions on a professional level is welcome! And as far as camera settings and shooting raw, I have some understanding of this and can do the research if I have to or ask here at smugmug. I also have PhotoShop as well to help these photos be the best that they can be. I forgot to add that all artwork will be against a white background when it's being photographed.

So, for the most part, I do understand photography and am excited to get your professional advice! So, on this note I will sit back and keep reading the wonderful help I am getting. Thank you all for your time!

pathfinder

I thought the photographs were to be web images to represent your artistic creations, but now if I understand correctly, you want to be able to print these and sell the actual photographic prints, rather than the originals?

If this is correct, then I better understand your concern about using smaller cameras, and I would agree that a full frame camera will offer better final quality at larger print sizes. I was considering web images of maybe 800-1000 pixels long.

Having said that, this review of 13 x 19 in prints made with a G10 and a $40,000 medium format Phase One back is rather interesting. It was very difficult for a series of pros to distinguish which print was shot with which camera.

Bear in mind, that the G10 was shot in a quite professional manner, in RAW, with a tripod and time release I am certain, and processed in Lightroom or Photoshop or both and professionally printed on an Epson 3800 by Michael Reichman himself.

One concern for copy photography is a polarized filter for the camera and sometimes, polarized filters for the light sources as well to prevent any glare from the print surface.

I would think two soft boxes at 45 degrees from the print surface should give nice even glare free illumination from all but a glossy surface. A glossy surface can be challenging, and may require double polarization as mentioned above. I seem to recall Bill Atkinson used double polarization lighting for images of his rock pictures for his book "Within the Stone"

I am certain there are others with more experience than mine at copying art work who can voice their opinions here as well. I hope my suggestions have been helpful.

Nikolai

4artsake wrote:

...I can't purchase my dream camera, a 5DMkII right now, but I can rent the cameras being suggested and I can purchase some smaller items like lighting, etc. for these shots. ...

It's a fairly common misunderstanding for a novice to consider the lighting to be something "small". It's neither small, nor simple, and nor inexpensive.
Yes, it is possible to do a lot of things mcgyver/diy style, but in the end you will simply spend adequate (or much more) amount of time instead of the money only to get the same (if you lucky) results.
For a mid-level solution (where most of us mere mortals dwell) the expenses curve goes like this (from cheapest to most expensive items): body - glass - lighting - space

Nikolai

pathfinder wrote:

I thought the photographs were to be web images to represent your artistic creations, but now if I understand correctly, you want to be able to print these and sell the actual photographic prints, rather than the originals?

If this is correct, then I better understand your concern about using smaller cameras, and I would agree that a full frame camera will offer better final quality at larger print sizes. I was considering web images of maybe 800-1000 pixels long.

Having said that, this review of 13 x 19 in prints made with a G10 and a $40,000 medium format Phase One back is rather interesting. It was very difficult for a series of pros to distinguish which print was shot with which camera.

Bear in mind, that the G10 was shot in a quite professional manner, in RAW, with a tripod and time release I am certain, and processed in Lightroom or Photoshop or both and professionally printed on an Epson 3800 by Michael Reichman himself.

One concern for copy photography is a polarized filter for the camera and sometimes, polarized filters for the light sources as well to prevent any glare from the print surface.

I would think two soft boxes at 45 degrees from the print surface should give nice even glare free illumination from all but a glossy surface. A glossy surface can be challenging, and may require double polarization as mentioned above. I seem to recall Bill Atkinson used double polarization lighting for images of his rock pictures for his book "Within the Stone"

I am certain there are others with more experience than mine at copying art work who can voice their opinions here as well. I hope my suggestions have been helpful.

I remember a few threads on this topic from about two years ago and IIRC the trickiest things to photograph correctly are canvases (due to their micro-relief) and reflective 3D art (see MA#1 Bottles). I think Ken (Liquid Air) did a lot of work in this area (and he was also the lead in MA#1). I also remember somebody (was it David S85?) building a huge custom diffuser (from PVC and bedsheets or something like that) for a similar purpose. And yes, double polarization can be a winning ticket, or at least help tremendously...

However, for simple tasks, like a small graphic sketch shown in the OP, all this can be a slight overkill...

raptorcaptor

My brother in law is doing an art book, and had to photograph artwork. He used a Canon 5D, a gitzo tripod with a lateral arm. He used LED lights as he was not allowed to use flash. I'll email him, and find more info on the lights. I know they were fairly inexpensive.

Art Scott

the walk in light tent is relatively easy and inexpensive....using pvc pipe (like 1") and flat muslin or cotton white sheets from a goodwill or salvation army store......it can be made any size one need and the nyou just use clamps to hold sheets in place or velcro....i use black plastic clamp pleirs from Harbor freight for mine....

4artsake

Well, I did a lot of research on lighting and I stand corrected. Thank you Nikolai. You can have all the right equipment, but the wrong lighting can make or break some shots, especially of artwork. I found that very interesting. I have a lot of research and work a head of me. All this talk about equipment and technique is making me a little nervous...will I meet my deadline? Yikes!

RaptorCaptor- I would appreciate that info on your brother in law and his photography for that art book.

raptorcaptor

4artsake wrote:

Well, I did a lot of research on lighting and I stand corrected. Thank you Nikolai. You can have all the right equipment, but the wrong lighting can make or break some shots, especially of artwork. I found that very interesting. I have a lot of research and work a head of me. All this talk about equipment and technique is making me a little nervous...will I meet my deadline? Yikes!

RaptorCaptor- I would appreciate that info on your brother in law and his photography for that art book.

Margaret, my brother-in-law used Wescott's Spiderlights for photographing the artwork for his book. I think for your application regular strobes will probably be better. The artwork he was photographing was archived in museums, and I don't think he was allowed to use flash. The lens he used was a Canon 16-35L on a Canon 5D.

4artsake

raptorcaptor wrote:

Margaret, my brother-in-law used Wescott's Spiderlights for photographing the artwork for his book. I think for your application regular strobes will probably be better. The artwork he was photographing was archived in museums, and I don't think he was allowed to use flash. The lens he used was a Canon 16-35L on a Canon 5D.

Thanks raptorcaptor

4artsake

I'm going to assume this thread, is for the most part, done Thanks all, for your participation and wealth of information. I am very grateful and can't wait to get to work!

Tiziano

An artist friend of mine in Florence just posted this here. Kind of interesting.

4artsake

Tiziano wrote:

An artist friend of mine in Florence just posted this here. Kind of interesting.

Hi Tiziano,

Thank you! It is great help to see how the studio was set up and the difference between the two variations of the same painting...which, BTW, looks just like my mother when she was a very young woman! When I saw it I was shocked. The resemblance is remarkable! Beautiful portraiture art! I am looking into the advice you posted at the beginning of this thread It is the one that I am most comfortable with. Thank you again Tiziano. I'm sure I can find your email and I will send some examples

Take care friend,
Margaret

Tiziano

Also notice the color gauge taped to the frames of the paintings being photographed. I had forgotten to suggest that earlier.

Feel free to PM me, anytime.