At 11:28 AM 5/25/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>According to different sources I've read that one should, a) just scan
>the negative with no correction and do post processing in an image
>editor or, b) correct major faults like over/under exposure, color,
>crop, level horizon with the scanner software and fine tune with the
>image editor. Is this a personal preference thing or is there a
>technical reason why one way is better than another?
I think it's just personal preference, since I've achieved good (and awful)
results using each of the above workflow variations. Experiment until you
achieve the results you want. I'm sure that *technically* there's a better and
a worse way, but as with audiophile equipment, if you can't hear the difference
between the $500.00 and the $30,000.00 amp, there's just no point paying the
30K. If either method (or some others) gives you a pleasing image and the
admiration of your peers, then "good on ya, mate."
Garth
< 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 >
|