ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] RE: Correct/best methods of scanning




> > Some friends say that scanning must be done to the exact final size,
> > because every resampling is destructive.
>
> It is true that every resampling is destructive...but it is NOT true that
> you must scan to the exact final size.  Where the downsampling happens it
> still only happens once.

To correct this a bit...every downsampling IS destructive, but how
destructive is up to methodology.  Downsampling a huge amount can lose
detail that is maintained if you downsample in increments.  As stated by my
self and others, you really need to try different methods and see what works
best for you.

Austin

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.