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: keeping the 16bit scans



From: "Austin Franklin" <austin@darkroom.com>
>> I hadn't thought about the need for a crop, so that's one good reason
to
>> keep 16bit files.

> What does bit depth (16 bits) have to do with cropping?  I missed the
reasoning behind that...

I'm not sure!  :-)   I guess I trhought (from another post) that if you
chose a small crop and created a new image from it, then did further
corrections, etc. (maybe even upsizing) that an original 16bit is better
than 8bit?  Feel free to correct me!

EdV

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.