Arduino Forum

Community => Bar Sport => Topic started by: codlink on Apr 04, 2013, 03:31 am

Title: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 04, 2013, 03:31 am
All I have is an IPhone to take pics of my work.  Was looking at getting a cheap camera for close ups and macro work of the PCBs I make.

Anybody got any input?
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: focalist on Apr 04, 2013, 05:10 am
Macro is really about getting decent lighting.  Photography (what you are trying to do) is "Painting with Light" and takes a bit more than a camera to do- it takes thinking about how light falls, and how it works with a lens.  Snapshots are easy- photography is a bear.

You really don't need anything particularly good as a camera, in fact, the iphone sensor should perform just fine for something as contrasty and low resolution (compared to, say, portraits) as a PCB.

What you want to do is get a nice holder of one type or another for the iphone, a tripod of sorts.  No matter which one, just something to hold the thing in a decent, steady position.

Now, put it on preview, and if you have a mode which is usually marked as macro or for "closeups", try that.  Light the room as you normally would using ceiling lighting (direct or indirect from lamps or whatever) bright enough to light the subject well, but not so much as to to make dramatic shadows.  Shadows are enemies. Now, get yourself a couple of light sources, standard desk lamps are fine.  Place a screen of some sort- even some paper- in front of one, to spread the light out.  Place that forty five degrees off to the camera right.  Now take a second light, and place that on the left, about 45 degrees also, but as much as sixty degrees to keep any glare minimized.  The board should be resting on a neutral surface, neither too light or dark, and the background for all of it should be dark but not totally black.  An alternative to all of this is a light tent, which is a tent or box made of cloth (usually nylon or silk), you put the object inside and light the outside of the tent.  It's really all about getting the light spread around without getting glare spots.  A good presentation angle is to place something small (a half inch or so) under the far side of the board to tilt it toward the camera.

This is a really bad description of poor man's "Rembrandt" lighting, and it's a balanced look that usually works for most things.  Because diffusion screens take 40-70% of light, the overall effect is workable and looks fairly professional, even with the most basic camera.  In any case, I'd recommend that you search out a good tutorial online- it's rarely the camera that makes the difference in this sort of shot- it's setup and planning.  An expensive camera will just take a very high resolution image of a bad shot :)
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 04, 2013, 06:49 am
Wow, thanks for all the tips.  I have been using desk lamps plus the ceiling lights to illuminate the item.  The problem is that the cameras I have, if you get too close (like less than 6"), the focus diminishes.  Beyond the 6", the item in the image just seems too far away to get any of the fine details. 

I have spent the last 2 hours Googling on how to make clean close ups.  And I must admit, it's a bit over-whelming at how much thought and work go into making those detailed close-ups.  I will keep studying and play with putting paper over the lights like you said. 
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: Osgeld on Apr 04, 2013, 07:35 am
yea what kills phone camera's is the fixed lens, when I went out for a camera I tested them in a store taking a picture of the card with the price on it

keeping within budget, and keeping the wife happy netted us a nice little point n shoot olympus for 100 bucks. We are not photographers so the camera does pretty good for simple stuff.

course you can find them cheaper, my old camera was a 2 megapixel toshiba which absolutely kicked butt at PCB photos, which was free.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: Ran Talbott on Apr 04, 2013, 08:02 am
First suggestion: look up reviews for your specific model of iPhone, and see how well its camera fared. My recollection is that some are good, and some not.

If you decide you need a camera, look in places like craigslist and Goodwill for ones that are dirt cheap because they're a few years old and don't have 40 gazillion megapixels.  Many cameras with what are now considered "too small" sensors had superb optics.  Unless the PCBs you're photographing are PC motherboards, 3-5 megapixels should be plenty.

I disagree with the suggestion of a tripod: you're going to want something more like a "copy stand" to hold the camera pointing dead straight at the PCB.  If you try to use a tripod, you'll find that the legs get in the way, or you have to cantilever the camera out so far that it becomes unstable, or you have to try to prop up the subject at odd angles to get the camera's axis perpendicular to it.  To make one really cheaply, start with a base that's nice and flat, and about 10-12 inches on a side.  Something like one of those plastic kitchen  cutting boards that's about half an inch thick should do.  Mount a vertical piece of 2x2 lumber to it. Attach your camera/phone holder to another piece.of 2x2, and use a C-clamp to hold it horizontal at the right height.

You can get fancier and more expensive, but that's all you really need for occasional use.


Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: rvasque on Apr 04, 2013, 09:49 am
You can just put it on a  flat bed scanner and scan it.

You don't want a Macro Lens and be situated real close... you'll have a very shallow depth of field, then you'll need a program to stitch different shots together to get something usable.

Stand the PCB/work on it's edge, light it up (static lighting, or use a diffused flash (pointed to the ceiling makes for a nice even lighting)... then zoom in on your PCB. Take a shot.  You'll have plenty of depth of field. Even a 6/8MP camera, when zoomed in you'll see lots of detail. I mean, how much detail do you really need?

Me, standing back 2-3 feet, using a 24-105F4L lens, I can take pretty good closeup of PCBs/parts... sometimes too good that when I import the shots into PhotoShop, I could see dust particles sitting on the PCB/resistors/etc... then I have to clone them out using Photoshop.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: wizdum on Apr 04, 2013, 02:35 pm
I picked up a Sony A330 on eBay for cheap. Its a decent entry level DSLR, plenty of features, seems pretty idiot proof (and was compatible with all my Minolta lenses).
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: MichaelMeissner on Apr 04, 2013, 03:23 pm

I disagree with the suggestion of a tripod: you're going to want something more like a "copy stand" to hold the camera pointing dead straight at the PCB.  If you try to use a tripod, you'll find that the legs get in the way, or you have to cantilever the camera out so far that it becomes unstable, or you have to try to prop up the subject at odd angles to get the camera's axis perpendicular to it.  To make one really cheaply, start with a base that's nice and flat, and about 10-12 inches on a side.  Something like one of those plastic kitchen  cutting boards that's about half an inch thick should do.  Mount a vertical piece of 2x2 lumber to it. Attach your camera/phone holder to another piece.of 2x2, and use a C-clamp to hold it horizontal at the right height.

It depends on the tripod, they do make tripods where the center column reverses and you mount the camera underneath the legs.

With all cameras, the issue with macro is depth of field.  Often times a single shot will not have everything in focus.  This is one area where the cameras with smaller sensors can win out over DSLRs is that the depth of field is larger for a given aperture for a smaller sensor over a larger sensor (but then, due to diffraction, the larger sensor cameras can often stop the aperture down).  If you want to take detailed shots of macro where everything is in focus, you probably want to investigate focus stacking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_stacking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_stacking)

If you use google to search for 'arduino focus stacking' you will see code to control various Canon and Nikon cameras that you can build on an Arduino platform.  Since, I tend to shoot with Olympus cameras, I don't know which Canon/Nikons are compatible with the focus stacking support.

I could imagine instead of telling the camera to change the lens focus, you could do it the more traditional route, and have a camera with manual focus on a platform with rails and use a stepper motor to precisely move the camera back/forward and take a picture, and then use the focus stacking software to make the final image.  For example: http://www.diyphotography.net/create-an-automated-macro-rails-for-image-stacking (http://www.diyphotography.net/create-an-automated-macro-rails-for-image-stacking)

In looking at the last link, they had a link to another technique of using the lens from a DVD player to put on your cellphone for simple macro shooting: http://www.diyphotography.net/super-macro-your-cellphone-camera-with-a-dvd-lens (http://www.diyphotography.net/super-macro-your-cellphone-camera-with-a-dvd-lens)
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 04, 2013, 05:26 pm

First suggestion: look up reviews for your specific model of iPhone, and see how well its camera fared. My recollection is that some are good, and some not.


I have an IPhone 4 and it takes decent pics for everyday shots.  But, terrible at close ups. 


I picked up a Sony A330 on eBay for cheap. Its a decent entry level DSLR, plenty of features, seems pretty idiot proof (and was compatible with all my Minolta lenses).


Just looked these up on Ebay and the body goes for very cheap, but the lenses are in the hundreds.  Might have to keep an eye on this one.


You can just put it on a  flat bed scanner and scan it.


That is an interesting idea!  I will have to try that.


In looking at the last link, they had a link to another technique of using the lens from a DVD player to put on your cellphone for simple macro shooting: http://www.diyphotography.net/super-macro-your-cellphone-camera-with-a-dvd-lens (http://www.diyphotography.net/super-macro-your-cellphone-camera-with-a-dvd-lens)


Bookmarked!  I have a few DVD players laying around.  I will definitely have to try that.

Thanks for all the advice!  Had no idea we had photographers on an Arduino site! 

+Karma all around!
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: wizdum on Apr 04, 2013, 05:39 pm



I picked up a Sony A330 on eBay for cheap. Its a decent entry level DSLR, plenty of features, seems pretty idiot proof (and was compatible with all my Minolta lenses).


Just looked these up on Ebay and the body goes for very cheap, but the lenses are in the hundreds.  Might have to keep an eye on this one.



I picked up one for my dad without the lens for $250, and mine came with the stock lens for $300. They were store display units that Sony wouldn't allow the stores to sell as open box I guess. IIRC, the A200 is a lot cheaper, and the only major difference is the lack of a tilt LCD.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: rvasque on Apr 04, 2013, 05:45 pm
The nice thing about scanning, is you'll have a true scale image without too much work. Put a ruler on the edge of your PCB, scan at 300dpi (or higher), then import to Photoshop and you have a highly detailed image that's also true to scale without perspective distortion.

Here's an example PCB scan (not mine).
(http://www.eijndhoven.net/jos/relaixedsmd/fotos/scan-pcb-mountedsmd.jpg)
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 04, 2013, 06:37 pm

I picked up one for my dad without the lens for $250, and mine came with the stock lens for $300. They were store display units that Sony wouldn't allow the stores to sell as open box I guess. IIRC, the A200 is a lot cheaper, and the only major difference is the lack of a tilt LCD.


Yea, I don't think I will need a tilt LCD..  Thanks for the info.


The nice thing about scanning, is you'll have a true scale image without too much work. Put a ruler on the edge of your PCB, scan at 300dpi (or higher), then import to Photoshop and you have a highly detailed image that's also true to scale without perspective distortion.

Here's an example PCB scan (not mine).


Holly cow, that is nice.  I have a scanner, but don't know if it is that good..  I will have to try mine this evening.  I will post up what I get.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 05, 2013, 12:55 pm
Just an update, I have a Power Shot A590 and I actually managed to sit down and read the manual.  It has a Macro and did some test shots.  I will have to find a place to host the pics.

I also tried the scanner.  Had to set the DPI to 600 (highest for mine) to get some detail.  Came out pretty sweet I think.  Only problem, It takes good scans with a non-populated board, but with an IC, it's too far off the glass to get sharp images.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: rvasque on Apr 05, 2013, 10:38 pm
I think much depends on your scanner's optical quality too. Some flat bed scanners can scan small 3D objects just fine on top of the glass.

http://www.hp.com/united-states/consumer/digital_photography/organize_archive_photos/tips/3d_scanning.html#2
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 06, 2013, 12:15 am
This one is the scan.  I took a scan of every board I designed.  I just just uploaded the first one I seen.
(http://s19.postimg.org/7qywy1nsv/MICA644_Scan_FRT.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/7qywy1nsv/)

(http://s19.postimg.org/ndq6bf1kv/IMG_2164.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ndq6bf1kv/)

If CrossRoads views this board, he might find it familiar..  Since it came from him.  It's his Dual '328.
(http://s19.postimg.org/4zk8l6enz/IMG_2174.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4zk8l6enz/)
Yes, you can see the dust and lint in this one.

Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: rvasque on Apr 06, 2013, 03:42 am
This is the "problem" you get when your camera is too close to the subject, macro lens setting, and very wide aperture.
Your depth of field is very shallow. Only a few parts are in focus.

If you're going for an artsy-fartsy shot, this may be fine but if you want everything sharp and readable, it just doesn't work without resulting to focus-stacking and that's a lot of work too (taking multiple shots, running the software, etc).

(http://s19.postimg.org/4y5pe0ngi/IMG_2164.jpg)

Of course, this can be "fixed" by having everything on the same plane, i.e. shooting head-on. But you may still have that problem where the board and silkscreen is in focus and the tops of capacitors aren't. 

The solution is to stop down your aperture to f8 or higher, increase ISO and/or use lots of lighting, and step back further from the subject a few feet away then shoot. 
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: billhowl on Apr 06, 2013, 06:59 am
Or you can get one of this 60X Zoom LED Micro Lens Microscope w/ Protective Case for iPhone
(http://m2.img.dxcdn.com/CDDriver/img/sku_169777_101.jpg)
http://dx.com/p/protective-abs-back-case-mini-60x-microscope-with-led-currency-detector-light-set-black-silver-169777 (http://dx.com/p/protective-abs-back-case-mini-60x-microscope-with-led-currency-detector-light-set-black-silver-169777)
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: westfw on Apr 07, 2013, 03:28 am
Frankly, most cameras above the "ultra-cheap" variety  have pretty good macro capabilities these days.
You can find a bunch of suggestions for improving your close-ups over at http://instructables.com, including clever ideas like using reading glasses as closeup lenses.  But I think the best advice was along the lines of:
"Your camera has many megapixels, because that's become a marketing number.  No one wants to see all of them in a 3.2MB file uploaded to a forum.  Put your camera further away so it can focus better, and then crop your picture to include the relevant bits using your favorite photo editor."
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: focalist on Apr 09, 2013, 02:48 pm
So true.  Even worse when camera dorks like me forget to do that kind of thing on an ACTUAL 24 megapixel image.  In RAW (without lossy, poorly done JPG compression done on an MCU) it's not uncommon to have 20 megabytes for a single picture.  Since the first hard drive I ever owned would have only held half of one picture, I think we can agree that storage amount is overkill.

Most digitals have many resolutions to choose from, even the cheapos.  Since a lot of people don't want to edit, just frame, click and post- at least setting the resolution to something reasonable like 4 megapixel or something like 1024x768 is good electronic hygiene.  

The sensors, even the cheap ones, are getting remarkably good.  The Iphone 5 sensor's signal to noise ratio is better than the sensor in my first "Prosumer" digital SLR- but the fact that the sensor is larger and has infinitely better glass in front of it make the images, though technically noiser, a heck of a lot better than anything any iphone ever will produce.  Light physics doesn't change to meet marketing blurbs, usually.  That being said, it's usually the expensive gear that has aperture ranges that create the depth of field issues.  f/8 is probably about right, but if you are trying to do macro with a 50mm f/1.4 you're gonna have a problem.  The fifty dollar f/8 lump o glass is far better for macro than the $700 1.4 (at least until you stop down the 50mm to f/8 that is)

Photography is great in that in many ways it is a very exacting science- I find it hard to think of it in terms of Art, I picked up a camera as an outlet after being an engineer for years.  I like to think that my tendency to overthink and overengineer shots as being just another aspect of being the nerd I am proud to be :D  I am well known locally (and getting requests from troupes regularly now) for doing theatrical photography-  extremely tricky low-light work, and worst of all, it's PEOPLE, so they actually have to look good!
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: MichaelMeissner on Apr 09, 2013, 03:22 pm

f/8 is probably about right, but if you are trying to do macro with a 50mm f/1.4 you're gonna have a problem.  The fifty dollar f/8 lump o glass is far better for macro than the $700 1.4 (at least until you stop down the 50mm to f/8 that is)

This isn't the forum to get into the whole equivalence argument, and I'm sure Focalist already knows this, but depth of field of an aperture of f/8 depends on the sensor size.  For example, using Cambridge in Colour sensor size calculator (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm)), I plugged in f/8 with a full frame sensor/35mm film camera, and it says for a 2/3" sensor, that f/3.2 will give you an equivalent depth of field.  Now, a lot of photographers like razor thin depth of fields for isolating the subject from the background in portraiture, but for macro, you generally want as much depth of field as possible.  So a smaller sensor camera will give you more depth of field, though due to diffraction concerns, you typically can't stop the lens down to f/8.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: focalist on Apr 09, 2013, 04:27 pm
Hey Michael, by the way-  if you are ever interested in doing it, there is always call for local theater groups and that sort of thing.  The gigs are of course usually unpaid or at best a token payment, but you do get visibility and experience that is hard to get otherwise-- and theater people are a quirky amusing bunch.  As you are into the Steampunk/Ren/etc fair scene, it's pretty much that same, odd subset of folks that are the theater folks.  They also tend to get really amazed and appreciative of any technical assistance on props- Making a "haunted" table jump (solenoid) and bang... that's a miracle to them, frequently.  For Blithe, they needed a crystal ball to light up, but had no way to do it without a cord.  I slapped a  three watt power LED and a cell phone battery in the base, and it's the best thing sliced bread as far as they are concerned.  Low effort, but amount of comments and accolades for it has been just silly.  I haven't even done anything actually involving an Arduino yet.. but it will happen I'm sure of it.

If you give a call to the local arts groups, you will rapidly be inundated with requests.. and though not usually rewarding cash wise, it's usually very much so, amusement and challenge wise.. over the next couple of weeks I'll be doing Wizard of Oz, Annie, Blithe Spirit, and MacBeth.  I'm sure there's plenty around Ayer- it occured to me after chatting at KRF that if you aren't already, you seemed the type that really ought to be well ensconced with the local theater groups.

Attached is a shot of "Charles" for "Blithe Spirit", local theater doing it.  Took the press shots for the local paper last Thursday.  Supposed to come across as 1940 ish British and snobby... but look at it from the Depth of Field standpoint-- that's where those lenses that you can drive a truck through really shine.  No flash used, this is 100w Halogen PAR sidelit at about 6000K, hair and balance at about 2500K, 50w halogen and 20w LED.  Next to it is a still from the original 1945 film, where Charles is played by Rex Harrison.  The shot was taken with my Canon Rebel T2i, you can buy the camera with stock lens at Walmart for under $500.  A Canon 50mm prime f1.8 is another $89, the f/1.4 (only recently purchased, the King Richard's Faire gig paid for that lens) is more like $600, and still debating whether that upcharge for that increase is really worth it.  I know that you are another who takes pride in good results from minimalist equipment :)

(http://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Iec6vr7KUfI/UWSAQ1P8_iI/AAAAAAAABH0/3pKzdBDGFwo/s518/IMG_9676aAK.jpg)   (http://acertaincinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/rex-harrison-blithe-spirit.jpg)
Making shots like this happen is a LOT of fun :)  I am quite pleased with the work I did, it doesn't look out of place even next to the original cinema work.  As the guy with the camera, you become the director. Getting the "Charles"  look right took quite a while, but I think it came out pretty decent ;).  Not bad considering he's a local accountant.  "Elvira" will be coming over to the house later tonight, so I can shoot some stuff with her that emphasizes that she is quite dead, while still elegant, flirty and witty.  That's right, an attractive zombie.

(okay I promise no more hijacking the thread, didn't mean to get so far off track!)

OP:  The thing is, I would recommend that you go and search around Craigslist or something, and see if you can buy yourself a gently used digital SLR with a basic lens (usually they come with 18-55mm or similar basic zoom lens).  A Canon Rebel XT or XTi with that lens could probably be had these days used for two hundred dollars and would give you a tool that you won't regret having gotten!  I'm a Canon guy myself, but Nikon and Minolta and Sony (among others!) also produce a decent entry-level digital SLR for several years now- so the secondary market is easy to shop for a bargain.  Maybe try a Adorama or another well-known vendor of refurbs also.

I did a single search on ebay, and "Buy it Now", here's the first hit that came up- I am not recommending this one or anything, it's just to show it's typical pricing and setup:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-Digital-Rebel-XT-350D-8-0-MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-Black-Kit-w-/161005063785?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item257ca64e69

It's selling for $140.. so there's going to be quite a few for the under-$200-price tag range.  My Rebel XT was my first digital SLR, and it's still going strong today.  Several shots for Blithe came from it.

Used for Macro, that camera and lens can do quite well.  This stop-motion shot I took with the XT and 18-55mm, using Arduino to trigger a flash timed for the impact of a paint drop into a bowl:

(http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-foCRjEK0DN4/T72CzRZfN_I/AAAAAAAAA3w/igEzUZlsaFI/s795/IMG_1836a.jpg)

Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: AlxDroidDev on Apr 11, 2013, 09:34 pm

All I have is an IPhone to take pics of my work.  Was looking at getting a cheap camera for close ups and macro work of the PCBs I make.

Anybody got any input?


for basic macro photos, a camera phone will be a lot easier to use than a semi-pro camera with non-macro lenses. That is because the phone's tiny CMOS sensor will focus better on a near object.

The problem, however, is lighting: you need really good lighting to get good shots.

I don't have an iPhone (I am an Android fan), but my Galaxy S III's camera has a "Macro" focus setting, that allows me to take very good macro photos, specially considering the effort required (turn lamp on, adjust settings, point, focus, click).

For my Galaxy S III, I don't use it's built-in flash for macro photos. Good ambient light is way better.

the image below was taken with my Galaxy S III in the macro mode. It is a shield I am building that will host a L293D motor controller and a LM317T voltage regulator with an on-board digital voltmeter.

(http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/4975/20130402132811.jpg)

Considering it was taken with my cellphone, and zero investment was made in lenses or expensive lighting, I consider this an excellent result.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 11, 2013, 11:50 pm
That is a good pic.  But I want to get closer and to see more details than that.  My IPhone just won't do it. 

My old Canon does a much better job.  Plus, I don't do this for a living nor do I do it as a hobby.  I just wanted some nice pics of the boards I made.  I am looking for an all around good camera.  But, I don't have to have one..
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: AlxDroidDev on Apr 12, 2013, 12:26 am

That is a good pic.  But I want to get closer and to see more details than that.  My IPhone just won't do it. 

My old Canon does a much better job.  Plus, I don't do this for a living nor do I do it as a hobby.  I just wanted some nice pics of the boards I made.  I am looking for an all around good camera.  But, I don't have to have one..


That pic was taken in 8 megapixels, and I had to resize it (to less than 3Mpx) to upload. With the original image you can see a lot more details than that.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: rvasque on Apr 12, 2013, 08:58 am
What is your real intention for this photo? What kind of details do you want to see? Solder whiskers?
What Axl posted (reduced sized even) is enough for use in an assembly guide for the user.

Are you looking to do an optical inspection of SMD parts? An 8MP photo can also do that too.

Have you tried the scanner method? I scanned one of my boards at 1200dpi and it freaking humongous. You can see the thickness of the silkscreen paint applied.
Title: Re: Good, Cheap Camera for Close Ups? Macro?
Post by: codlink on Apr 12, 2013, 09:20 am

What is your real intention for this photo? What kind of details do you want to see? Solder whiskers?


Probably not that close.  And it's really not a big deal.  I am surprised at how many replies this subject has gotten. 

Quote

Are you looking to do an optical inspection of SMD parts? An 8MP photo can also do that too.


Yes, that would be a plus. 

Quote

Have you tried the scanner method? I scanned one of my boards at 1200dpi and it freaking humongous. You can see the thickness of the silkscreen paint applied.


First board is done with my scanner.
http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,158280.msg1188396.html#msg1188396

My scanner only goes to 600.  But it was still better than I though it would be.

Thanks gents for all the advise.