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: 8 bit versus 16



Henk,

> > If you require extreme tonal curve manipulation, then I suggest you
> > look at getting the image "right" on film, instead of relying on your
> > image editing program to get it right for you after the fact.
>
> I am a travel photographer in my spare time. Most of the time I come home
> from a travel I can not do a second time. The films I bring home
> is all the
> material I have. When light conditions at the moment of taking the photo
> were bad, but the photo is to important to miss, the only way to use the
> photo is by extreme manipulation.
>
> >  Of course, there are some instances where this is not
> possible/practical.
>
> So, in the end you admit...

I'd suggest re-reading what I wrote...this time carefully ;-)

I said I understood that situations exist where the image simply isn't taken
"right" in the first place.  That is an entirely separate issue from the
*need* to use high bit data for tonal curve manipulation, whether the
original image is "right" or not.

So, in the end, you, nor any one else, are able to provide an image that
substantiates these claims.  Funny how that is.

Regards,

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.