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: Laptop configuration



Alex--

Once you get the image exactly the way you want it then 8 bits is fine.

Many 8-bit images can stand a fair amount of color correction and 
tonal manipulation without problem.

But if you have to make large changes in tonality, color, etc. having 
more bits can protect you from visible posterization and other 
artifacts showing up in your images.

I like to scan high bit data into a wide gamut color space that's big 
enough to safely represent all the colors my scanner can capture, do 
my major tone and color corrections in that space with that data, 
archive this as a master file, then convert to more limited color 
spaces and bit depths for other purposes: e.g. sRGB at 8-bits for the 
web.

--Bill


At 6:54 PM +0200 14-10-01, Alex Z wrote:
>So there is no real difference between 12 and 8 bit color depth ??
>
>Alex



>[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Tom Scales
>
>I only scan at 8bits, so the file sizes are closer to 60Mb.  I can't tell
>the difference in the end result.  Makes a smaller memory footprint.
-- 

======================================================================
Bill Fernandez  *  User Interface Architect  *  Bill Fernandez Design

(505) 346-3080  *  bill@billfernandez.com  *  http://billfernandez.com
======================================================================




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.