> I want to take pictures at cemeteries and wondering what kind of > resolution I should look for in a digicam, as well as any other > features that would be good for genealogical purposes. I realize > that more pixels gives better pictures, but it makes for larger > pictures, more space taken up etc. > > [email protected] Actually, for every type of picture, there's an upper limit beyond which extra resolution is wasted. If you're interested in the inscription, etc, you don't need to be able to focus on every chrystal in the rock. I have found 300 dpi on an A4 picture is easily enough - although I've done some at 600. What's more important is to be able to switch the flash off (for example, if you photograph a highly polished stone, you're better without a flash as the stone will reflect the flash like a mirror) - if the light's not good, use a tripod and a slower shutter. If the camer's on a tripod and you have a remote release for it, you can use a reflector (I use tin foil over a sheet of card) to give indirect lighting which may throw an inscription into better relief. Rather than spend a fortune on a mega mega pixel camera, I'd invest (after the tripod and remote release) in decent photo-handling software - badly eroded inscriptions can often be read if you play with the image - remove a colour forexample. Photoshop Home Edition has a feature where it makes an image look embossed - which helps sometimes. Lesley Robertson "Lesley Robertson" <[email protected]>