Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: 24bit - 48bit dilemma & Work flow suggestions
----- Original Message -----
From: Ramesh Kumar_C <RKumar_C@zaplet.com>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 11:19 AM
Subject: filmscanners: 24bit - 48bit dilemma & Work flow suggestions
> Sorry, for asking pre-discussed topic. Once I get following doubts
> cleared, I think<smile>
> I will be ready to take on the scanning world.
> I am using Minolta Dimage II, VueScan. Scanner has 12bit/channel output &
> am using Adobe Photo 6.0.
> This is about 24bits & 48 bits:
> Scanner can deliver 36 bits; So I am in a dilemma whether to store the
> scanner output in 48bit TIFF file or 24bit TIFF file.
> I have thought of following 2 methods, let me know which of the following
> will be good.
> a) Store 36BIT Scanner output in 24 bit TIFF file. Edit this 24bit TIFF
> file in 8-bit channel in PS. This is easy solution.
> b) Store 36BIT Scanner output in 48 bit TIFF file. Edit this 48bit TIFF
> file in 16-bit channel in PS. Then convert 48bit TIFF file to 24 bits.
Given your reason for not wanting to store RAW scans below, I see no reason
to 'store' 48 bit files.
I suggest you output 48 bit files from Vuescan and do color correction in
Photoshop, then reduce to 8 bit per channel for storage. Most subsequent
editing and output will require 8 bit per channel files anyway.
> This is about WorkFlow:
> I use Win2000. Reason for using "BruceRGB" is its recommended in "Real
> of Photoshop". Let me know if its a good choice.
I think Bruce believes BruceRGB has been overcome by time and improvements
in scanners and scanning.
AdobeRGB has become a little more the standard, but this is a highly
> I am an amature; At present out-put device is going to be desk-top and I
> not going to print the images in near future.
> My negatives have lot of scratches/dust, so I have to scan them again
> another scanner which has ICE.
> So I do not want to store the RAW scan.
You really ought to spend some time learning technics to edit scratches/dust
in Photoshop. Digital ICE is not necessarly the only option. Such skills are
still good to develope.
> a) Scan using BruceRGB in VS, Copy to CD1. This I can use for re-editing
> provided my editing skills improove.
> b) Edit in BruceRGB using Adobe PS. Copy the ouput to CD2.
> c) Convert from BruceRGB to sRGB. And convert from TIFF to JPG and store
Why do CD3 at all? You could always use the images on CD2 and convert for
The only advantage I see in CD3 is added redundency.
> Please let me know your opinion about my workflow.