I have taken many very fine pictures of tombstones and by enlarging and sharpening them I was able to see dates that I wanted to record. Truthfully, the tombstones were not that bad, but I needed to see something I had not considered when photographing them. My experience would lead me to believe that it may help a *little*. The far greater advantage is that you don't have to risk damaging an already-deteriorating stone. I have *grave* concerns (pardon the pun) about applying anything to an aging stone and I think it is highly inadvisable to touch the surface at all. Chalk rubbings, scraping off excess shaving cream, brushing off flour, etc, are all very likely to remove more bits of the stone and the stone is likely already in poor condition or deteriorating if you have to consider those techniques in order to read it. I believe the greatest courtesy to the deceased and to other researchers would be to avoid touching the tombstone at all. Lynne NtnyLions@aol.com wrote: > > I'd like to know if anyone has had any success using digital cameras....any opinions out there?