DescentBB

I was just wondering what the best Digital Camera for a 3D artist? For say, using the camera to take pictures of nice patterns for photo realistic textures inside Photoshop. I plan to use it to take pictures especially of rock, tiles and metal of different sorts. I would also like a zoom of about 4x at least. From what I understand, it's optical zoom that you want. Any recommendations?


It turned out that I never picked up a camera last year due to lack of money. But this year, I have the money to do it.

Canon make great camera's. Yes, it is optical zoom you want. This is like a lens you buy for a SLR type. The bigger the optical zoom, the better looking picures you get from far.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6830120098

That one looks pretty good. Optical zoom is about average but it's the megapixels I'm after.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6830180092

This also looks pretty good. Anyone know anything about these two?

those are pretty mediocre cameras. I just got a Casio Exilim for $200 and I am extremely impressed (its a compact too). It takes better pictures then the $350 huge kodak my parents just got.

You need to learn how to use manual focus, and all the other settings, such as ISO and exposure. Mine has up to a 60 second focus, I have gotten some really good pictures.

If you want to get really intense, get a Canon Rebel. But unless you know how to use it, the results will come out poor.

Canon Rebel digital camera comes with both fully automatic and fully manual modes. I know since I own the non digital version and my friend owns the digfital one

HighOctane_Jared wrote:those are pretty mediocre cameras. I just got a Casio Exilim for $200 and I am extremely impressed (its a compact too). It takes better pictures then the $350 huge kodak my parents just got.

You need to learn how to use manual focus, and all the other settings, such as ISO and exposure. Mine has up to a 60 second focus, I have gotten some really good pictures.

If you want to get really intense, get a Canon Rebel. But unless you know how to use it, the results will come out poor.

I'm looking at about $200-$250 range max.

What model Exlim are you talking about?

[]V[]essenjah wrote:Best Digital Camera for 3D art/Photoshop texture work?

Surely you mean "Camera I can Afford for 3D..."? Because you certainly can't afford the best...

Well.... I probably could \"afford\" it if I had to REALLY stretch. But I don't know how much it will benefit me over other important things in my life right now.

The truth is, there is no \"best\" in technology because the term best, only lasts for a couple days if your lucky in the world of technology.

But, that is IF you REALLY want to think about it in such litteral terms. I'm referring to best for my usage. I mostly will be modding for games like D3 and possibly UT2007 and Oblivion.

Not to insult, but are you really this bored.... all the time to be nitpicking every post made on this board? Just wondering....

[]V[]essenjah wrote:I was just wondering what the best Digital Camera for a 3D artist? For say, using the camera to take pictures of nice patterns for photo realistic textures inside Photoshop. I plan to use it to take pictures especially of rock, tiles and metal of different sorts. I would also like a zoom of about 4x at least. From what I understand, it's optical zoom that you want. Any recommendations?


It turned out that I never picked up a camera last year due to lack of money. But this year, I have the money to do it.

I got a Digital Rebel XT for graduation but this is what I was looking at before being surprised with the graduation gift. It has awesome ratings and is the same megapixel as my Rebel...

Bee

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... veda619-20

I've always liked Nikon's stuff.

Nikon D2X

Most of those are out of my range. I don't really need anything super-fancy for game art. I'm not looking to be a professional photographer. I just want something to take pictures of metal, tiles, walls, whatever and then use it for a few other things like pictures of my car, or just casual road trips. I've never owned a really nice camera before. I've done a pretty decent job of taking pictures in the past and I just used small, cheap or just average cameras. One was digital but it was an absolute piece of crap. A lot of the time, I'll probably be cropping small swatches out of my pictures for textures.


Anyway, in no particular order, here is a list of the cameras I like thus far:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6830144097
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6830120068

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6830180106
This one is interesting because, though it has 7.1MP, it has 12X optical zoom.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6830180092
Lower end version of the above. 6X optical zoom.


It looks like all of them are about 3072 x 2304 resolution. More than enough for game textures. But how much of a difference with the megapixels make for such a high resolution? Especially between the ranges of 7.2 to 10 megapixels?

well, if you're looking to take pictures of textures, then you are going to want a camera with a decent macro ability since you are going to be getting close and dirty. And with a good macro, you'll probably want something with external flash for a bit of extra light for evenly lighting up your subject/pattern.

I deal with SLR's at the moment, but there are plenty of consumer cameras wtithin the price range you are looking for that can do what you need them to do.

And a good site to look at a few camera reviews and features is http://www.dpreview.com

[]V[]essenjah wrote:But how much of a difference with the megapixels make for such a high resolution? Especially between the ranges of 7.2 to 10 megapixels?

There would be no noticable difference between the 8 and 10. Since money is a factor, and according to consumer reports, the camera in my link has better quality than the ones you show and is cheaper... plus it ships for free.

Bee

Better quality? How so? It does have 8 Megapixels but the ones I show are between 7.2 and 10. Also, the camera you show is about 4X Optical Zoom. These range from 6X-12X. 12X= 4 times the optical zoom of the camera you pointed out. Wouldn't it?

The one I like has 6X optical zoom and 10 megapixels.

Still better than 4X optical zoom and 8 megapixels.

I'm just a little confuzzled.

Hey Thrawn, could you explain exactly what macro is and what I'm looking for with Macro and Flash?

[]V[]essenjah wrote:Better quality? How so? It does have 8 Megapixels but the ones I show are between 7.2 and 10. Also, the camera you show is about 4X Optical Zoom. These range from 6X-12X. 12X= 4 times the optical zoom of the camera you pointed out. Wouldn't it?

The one I like has 6X optical zoom and 10 megapixels.

Still better than 4X optical zoom and 8 megapixels.

I'm just a little confuzzled.

Hey Thrawn, could you explain exactly what macro is and what I'm looking for with Macro and Flash?

I should not have said lower quality, I was in a hurry when I posted and I saw Samsung. We never had any luck with that brand. One of your picks was the Canon A640 and since you say money was still a concern I went with the Canon A630 at 8MP because its the sister to their A640 at 10MP with both having 4X optical zoom and it ships in two days free at $197.

Consumer Reports lists that particular Canon A640 as their number one pick in the latest issue with the Canon A630 coming in second. We are very tuned to Consumer Reports and always check them whenever we buy anything.

The zoom might give you a problem because the 10 and 12X zooms will give you a less than sharp picture if you hand hold without a fast lens.

A Macro lens lets you getreallycloselikethis so if you want to get within inches of your subject you will need one which them raises the price by putting you in a different category of cameras.

Bee

Looks like that Cannon has macro. What is a good macro range would you say?


Also, about external flash.... from what I was told, that allows you to remove the flash. Can't you just shut the flash function off?

BTW Thrawn, I ran a search on there and I'm not seeing any cameras with external flash for under $300. Which is my price range. :\\

[]V[]essenjah wrote:Looks like that Cannon has macro. What is a good macro range would you say?


Also, about external flash.... from what I was told, that allows you to remove the flash. Can't you just shut the flash function off?

BTW Thrawn, I ran a search on there and I'm not seeing any cameras with external flash for under $300. Which is my price range. :\\

I don't know much about macro. I go the other way using a canon 70-200 f2.8L but according to the canon site for that camera... (select features and scroll down)

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/contr ... elid=14108

the macro looks pretty good. You have full control of your flash whether you want it on, auto or off but you can't plug a remote flash into it.

How far away are these textures you want to photograph?

Bee

http://www.cgtextures.com/


That is a great example of the kinds of textures I'm looking at shooting.

I did some reading on external flash. Basically, it is supposed to even out the light a little bit better, but it is recommended that rather than do that, aim the flash up at the ceiling as it will still be very uneven.

I'll quote a statement by a guy that does photography for that site on macro functionality:
\"A macro lens is not needed either, unless you want to photograph from very closeup (insects, coins, etc). Most textures are a bit too 'rough' when you photograph them really closeup, so they are not very useful. You can also use a macro lens for normal photography ofcourse, it can also photograph objects from a distance.\"

Another interesting quote:

\"If you want a camera purely for texture shooting get a SLR and a non-zoom lens (also called a 'prime' lens). Prime lenses are very sharp and usually have no distortion, these are the two most important things for a texture. Since you only want to take pictures of static objects you can afford to walk back and forth to get your whole object in the picture. Most if my pictures are shot with a prime 50mm f1.8 Nikkor lens which cost me about 100$. This lens has no distortion at all (so straight lines stay straight), and is very sharp and light sensitive. \" -Marcel

The problem though, is that SLR camera's are very out of my range and I'd like to have one that is decent for texture work, but also is useful for taking on trips. Especially since I'll be using it a lot for taking pictures for textures when I go on trips. We spend a lot of our trips in canyons in Utah or places like Wyoming. Even Colorado in places like Mesa Verde (we went there last year).

I also occasionally go to airshows when I get a chance.

[]V[]essenjah wrote:http://www.cgtextures.com/


That is a great example of the kinds of textures I'm looking at shooting.

I did some reading on external flash. Basically, it is supposed to even out the light a little bit better, but it is recommended that rather than do that, aim the flash up at the ceiling as it will still be very uneven.

I'll quote a statement by a guy that does photography for that site on macro functionality:
"A macro lens is not needed either, unless you want to photograph from very closeup (insects, coins, etc). Most textures are a bit too 'rough' when you photograph them really closeup, so they are not very useful. You can also use a macro lens for normal photography ofcourse, it can also photograph objects from a distance."

Another interesting quote:

"If you want a camera purely for texture shooting get a SLR and a non-zoom lens (also called a 'prime' lens). Prime lenses are very sharp and usually have no distortion, these are the two most important things for a texture. Since you only want to take pictures of static objects you can afford to walk back and forth to get your whole object in the picture. Most if my pictures are shot with a prime 50mm f1.8 Nikkor lens which cost me about 100$. This lens has no distortion at all (so straight lines stay straight), and is very sharp and light sensitive. " -Marcel

The problem though, is that SLR camera's are very out of my range and I'd like to have one that is decent for texture work, but also is useful for taking on trips. Especially since I'll be using it a lot for taking pictures for textures when I go on trips. We spend a lot of our trips in canyons in Utah or places like Wyoming. Even Colorado in places like Mesa Verde (we went there last year).

I also occasionally go to airshows when I get a chance.

As for the flash, you can always turn it off on the camera and use some inexpensive studio lights if the textures are indoors. If outdoors, you can use a reflective mirror to brighten the subject.

Everything you are saying is leading to a SLR camera with interchangeable lenses but carrying a camera like that on trips can get cumbersome.

I would say find yourself a Walmart http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product. ... id=5238359 and try the camera we talked about. You can always bring it back.

Art those texture art thingys indoors?

Bettina

Hmmmm, what about a super-bright LED flashlight? I carry one of those everywhere I go. It can light up a whole room. Cost about $35. They used to run $45 when I bought my first flashlight. Just point that at the ceiling and turn the flash off?