>> >... 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
>
>
My understanding that any 30 bit scanner throws out the bits over 24 in the
final image.
Winsor
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|