Photograph or Scan?

Photograph or Scan? An Artist’s Perspective on Artwork Reproduction

People often ask me what the real difference is between photographing an artwork and scanning it. On the surface, both methods seem to achieve the same result: a digital image of a painting, drawing, print, or document. But as someone who has spent years working with artists, galleries, and collectors, I can say with certainty that the approach matters deeply—especially when accuracy, scale, and preservation are at stake.

A flatbed scanner might seem like the logical choice. Place the artwork on the glass, close the lid, press a button, and out comes a digital copy. But the reality is more complex. Scanners are limited by size: only small works or sections of larger works can be scanned. That often means stitching multiple images together, which introduces visible seams, uneven lighting, and subtle distortions. Even more problematic, the glass surface of a scanner creates glare, especially with glossy paints, graphite, or textured prints. Instead of capturing the life of the artwork, a scan often flattens it.

By contrast, my photography setup is specifically designed for fine art reproduction. Using a professional copystand, I can photograph works of any scale in a single exposure—whether it’s a delicate sketch or a large canvas. The camera is fixed in precise alignment, ensuring every edge is square and every detail sharp. With adjustable, balanced lighting, I can adapt to the needs of the medium. Oils and acrylics benefit from angled light that reveals their texture without glare, while watercolours and prints demand soft, even illumination that honours their tonal subtlety.

Another advantage of photography is colour fidelity. With careful calibration, I can produce true-to-life images that represent the artwork exactly as intended. This isn’t just technical—it's about respect. Artists pour themselves into their work, and it’s my responsibility to capture that essence faithfully. The resulting files are high-resolution, perfectly lit, and suitable for catalogues, illustrated books, online archives, or exhibitions.

Ultimately, the choice between photographing and scanning is less about convenience and more about quality. For archival purposes, professional reproduction photography simply provides a truer, more versatile record. It preserves scale, avoids glare, and ensures artworks are documented in a way that honours their presence.

In my own practice, I think of reproduction photography as a collaboration between the artist and the technician. The goal is not just to make an image, but to safeguard the integrity of the artwork for future viewers—whether in print, online, or in archives. That’s why, when artists ask me “photograph or scan?” my answer is always the same: photograph, done properly, will serve you and your work far better. Photograph

FAQs

1. Why not just use a home scanner for artworks?

Home scanners are fine for documents, but they flatten artworks, create glare, and are limited in size. They rarely produce true archival quality.

2. Isn’t scanning sharper than photography?

Not necessarily. A professional photographic setup produces files that are just as sharp, often sharper, with none of the limitations of a scanner bed.

3. What about very large artworks?

A photograph can capture large works in one exposure, while scanners require multiple stitched scans, which often introduces distortion.

4. Does photography work for textured surfaces?

Yes. With controlled lighting, photography can capture depth, brushstrokes, and texture without glare. Scanning usually flattens these qualities.

5. Is colour accuracy better in a scan?

With calibrated lighting and cameras, photography often produces truer colours than a scan, especially for subtle tones and gradients.

6. Can photographs be used for printing catalogues or books?

Absolutely. High-resolution reproduction photographs are ideal for professional publishing.

7. What about delicate or fragile works on paper?

Photography avoids pressing the artwork against scanner glass, making it safer for fragile or historic works.

8. Are photographs suitable for online galleries and websites?

Yes. They can be scaled, optimised, and shared digitally without losing detail or colour integrity.

9. Is professional reproduction photography expensive?

It’s an investment, but it ensures archival-quality images that protect the artist’s legacy and can be used across multiple platforms.

10. Which method is best for long-term preservation?

Professional reproduction photography, when done correctly, provides the most faithful and versatile record for archives, collectors, and future generations.