> >... is there any advantage to scanning at 2700,
> >and having photoshop scale it down?
>
> I suspect the opposite -- your scanner firmware is working at a greater bit
> depth, and I'll bet its interpolation will be more accurate than
> Photoshop's at a mere 24 bits.
>
> General rule: try to get as much work done where the most information is.
> In your case, I believe your Coolscan works with 30 bits internally, so
> anything you can do in the scanner will be better than what you can do in
> Photoshop, assuming the firmware developers did their job. It may not be
> *detectably* better, but in theory, it should be better.
>
It depends, if Shawn use an old Coolscan (LS-10) it is only a 24 bit scanner.
> (It may be worth comparing to make sure it isn't worse -- firmware
> developers don't always do their jobs... :-)
>
Yes, you are right, my new Nikon LS2000 use only "bilinear" for interpolation.
While in Photoshop you can set it to "bicubic" which according to Photoshop,
should provide better result.
C.H.Ling
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|