Originally Posted by terrie
Interesting...I would have thought a scanner would be "better" but maybe it's getting too much detail???
Or it's shadows - scanners can throw funny shadows of not-quite-flat objects (or more of not-flat-at-all objects). So if there's a lot of texture in the paint, the shadows may be all "wrong". With normal photography you can control the direction and "sharpness" of the lighting, which you cannot do with a scanner. You might also get funny glints on shiny bits of paint. No way anyway to get the even lighting one uses for reproduction photography.