Ideal combination - a teleobjective so the flash doesn't make the mini too exposed to the light (ideal with attached flash) and low depth of field , about 5.0 or 6.0. I am not sure about the right terms in English though so I will leave this to the natives.
The quick and dirty recommendation is a zoom lens on a beanbag from far away. It increases your depth of field so more is in focus.
Do you have big equipment or are you using a point and shoot?
Sag.
Actually if taking picture of a single mini, I would recommend a low depth of field which make a nice bokeh and makes the mini stand against the background.
EDIT: nevermind, we mean the same thing: high depth of field but low number of it, my bad.
This is a very timely topic, as I keep meaning to take some pictures of my work-in-progress on Space Hulk and Fury of Dracula, and then post them here.
However, this discussion is flying over my head. I used to take pretty good pictures with a Polaroid One-Step, but they don't sell that film anymore. So now my only camera is the one in my Verizon Chocolate cellphone. I've taken just a couple of pictures with it so far, but they have turned out well. So when taking pictures of my minis, I plan to just shoot em with some indirect lighting from a few feet away. Will that be okay? I realize that I could theoretically take a bunch of pictures and just improve by trial and error, but each shot seems to drain quite a bit of battery power.
If you have a decent light, you should be able to get a good picture on most occasions. If you plan to shoot a diorama or take pictures indoors, it's better to have a proper equipment. If you have an indirect light source which isn't too strong, you shall be ok, I would still recommend high depth of field and checking the white balance if able.
I'm by no means an expert but getting the lighting right seems to make a hell of a diffence to the mini photos I've taken. Ideally you want a light shining directly from above (I'm cheap and just use the strongest room light in my house!) and a seperate light shining from the left and the right (I use normal desktop lights for this).
With this simple lighting technique I manage to take photos like the witch hunters I've (hopefully) managed to attach.
Not brilliant quality, but good enough and with a very cheap camera.
Usually the photos I have seen that don't come out that well have to do with the lighting. I recommend about three or four high power (100watt or so) bulbs. Also take the photo on a white field since the white will reflect the light back onto the model and have the light penetrate into some of the harder to reach places on the models.
I've seen two ways to build a white field. One is to create a box about 2'x2'x2' with one open side out of white foamcore about 1/4" thick. Then shine the lights into the box. Since the box is closed on five sides there is a lot of white surface for the light to reflect off of and onto the model.
The other way I've seen is just getting a piece of white posterboard and leaning half on the wall and half on the floor (which removes a sharp edge that might appear with the box method). But this doesn't reflect as much light.
Also a general trend I've seen with cameras is that for whatever reason they seem to pick up more blemishes on the model than you actually see with your eye. Don't know why, but that seems to be the case.
What other people said. Use the "macro" setting. Have good lighting and don't use the camera flash. Use GIMP or other image editing software to brighten the photo up.
Games
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
