photocopying, scanning herbarium sheets
Dr. Gerald Stinger Guala
stinger at FAIRCHILDGARDEN.ORG
Fri Oct 4 10:44:39 CDT 2002
As I said before we find that the least damage is incurred by scanning the
regular way. In order to get a 300 dpi image, you need an 18 Megapixel
camera, these are still very expensive and very slow but the technology is
getting there. Of course that will be the way to go when the technology is
reasonable and efficient for it because there is no contact and generally
you use HMI lights which are not bad for the specimen or paper. On the low
end we find our 1.3 megapixel images to be much more useful than xeroxes,
faster, and more portable, and you can get a 1.3 mp camera for $150 now.
Gerald "Stinger" Guala, Ph.D.
Keeper of the Herbarium
Fairchild Tropical Garden Research Center
11935 Old Cutler Rd.
Coral Gables, FL 33156-4299
From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG]On Behalf Of
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:38 AM
To: TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG
Subject: Re: photocopying, scanning herbarium sheets
In response to:
1) Monique Reed wrote: More than one botanist I know has
taken to calling such photocopied (the 11" x 17" paper is
conveniently about the same size as a standard herbarium
sheets) or scanned-and-printed images "xerotypes" or
2) Stephen Manchester replied: I was taught never to turn a
herbarium specimen upside down due to the damage from
pieces that will fall away from the sheet. How does one
prepare photocopies or scans of herbarium sheets without
causing more damage than would have occurred by actually
loaning the specimens?
Sean Edwards replies:
Half-an-answer here, plus a question: Yes you are quite right. We
have played with an A3+ card (same size as photocopier platten)
with a hinged transparent cover to stop bits falling off when
photocopying. Pop the sheet in, invert onto platten, photocopy, turn
right way up, remove sheet and return to collections. But life is
never so simple:
Every transparent cover we have tried so far (e.g celluloid) tends to
be electrostatic, with the very real risk of parts of the plant being
pulled from the herbarium sheet when the cover is opened. We do
currently have two overworked technicians playing with the idea
(copy of this email to one of them, sorry Ron), trying different
materials, or drawing a metal bar over the cover before opening.
Even a photocopier's glass platten will (apart from facing the wrong
way) tend to electrostaticity(?), especially if cleaned first with a
cloth as often happens. This presumably might still cause damage
even with upside-down photocopiers which I believe exist at a no
doubt prohibitive cost to most herbariums.
Maybe digital photography (increasing quality, decreasing cost of
equipment and file storage) will overtake the need to photocopy,
and be in colour to boot.
Has anybody else gone down this road?
Sean R. Edwards BSc PhD,
Keeper of Botany,
The Manchester Museum, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
'Phone: +44 (0)161-275-2671/2; fax: +44 (0)161-275-2676
Email: sean.edwards at man.ac.uk
More information about the Taxacom