I've heard similar comments from others. This may indicate that some
flatbeds track more smoothly or pick up image data more reliably at certain
resolutions (which essentially amounts to tracking speed with most
flatbeds). Theoretically it should make no difference, but practically it
seems to.
For images I plan to archive or prints I scan at 300 ppi (prints on a
flatbed - I don't have a film scanner yet). Then I resample for online
viewing. As you've indicated, in some cases the images appear better than
those originally scanned at 100 ppi.
There's also an argument that resampling downward loses data which requires
software interpolation. Again, I've seen no practical difference in my own
scans.
So whatever works best is best.
-----------
Lex Jenkins
-------------------------------------------------------------
Visit "Vistas Tejas" at http://www.photoscene.com/lexjenkins/
<a href="http://www.photoscene.com/lexjenkins/";>Visit Vistas Tejas</a>
======================================================================
From: John Hudson <xyyc@xxxxxxxx>
I would like to add my $0.02 worth.
I scan prints at 1200 dpi having set the scaling percentage to around
30 0.000000or 4" x 6" prints and 25 0.000000or 5" x 7" prints. I save as an
uncompressed tif file which generally comes in at 8 to 10 mb. I then
resize the tif file to say 600 x 400 pixels, reduce the resolution to
100 dpi, tweek slightly with the unsharp mask, and then save the
uploadable file as a jpeg with about 30 ompression. I make no more
than one adjustment to the tif file before I save it as a jpeg. If I am
not satisfied with the jpeg I got back to the tif file and start over
again; I do not manipulate the jpeg file at all. I make a thumbnail by
going back to the tif file and repeating the above process except that
the thumbnail is either 125 pixels wide or high.
Compared to scanning at say 300 dpi and saving directly as a jpeg and
then manipulating the jpeg, the tif to jpeg routine produces far
superior images at least on my monitor. They look to have more life, are
truer to the original print, and display less "noise".
John Hudson
Vancouver, BC
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
< 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 >
|