Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















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

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

Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems



I'm suspicious.  They don't call jpeg lossy for nothing. I wonder if Mr. 
Lab Manager didn't pull a fast one on you and compress to jpeg and then 
expand and save as tiff.  If there weren't ANY difference between the 
jpeg and the tiff, no one would bother with tiff or PSD format. 
Something is "odd" in my opinion.  I am going to take a 50meggish file 
(I'll probably use a flatbed scan at 600 dpi, since I do not have a 4000 
dpi film scanner) and jpeg down to a 7:1 ratio and see what it looks like.

BTW, what bit depth was this 50 meg file?

I'll report back.

Art

Cooke, Julie wrote:

> I've just looked at the new 50MB scan, very noisy with some vertical
> banding. The scan is much too light, with the histogram showing no blacks.
> Can be easily corrected but some detail lost in the highlights of the scan.
> 
> They probably thought my trannie was too dark but it is of a swan, the swan
> is correctly exposed, so the background has gone dark.
> 
> I did the test and saved the image as a jpeg with 7:1 compression (level 10
> in Photoshop 5.5). I did a difference and the image came out black, showing
> no difference between the bitmap and the jpeg. I'm very very surprised and
> impressed at the quality jpeg. Although not enough to save my scans as jpeg
> obviously :-)
> 
> Julie
> 
> 





 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.