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]

[filmscanners] Re: JPG sharpening [was: Color spaces for different purposes]

On Sat, 8 Jun 2002 21:36:38 -0500, you wrote:

>True enough, but if the image requires sharpening?  JPG is not a good
>format, I know, but it is very useful and in fact necessary for the web.  I
>would think it better to convert to JPG and then sharpen rather than sharpen
>in TIFF and then convert.  I haven't tested but I think it would result in
>fewer artifacts.

Well there may be other variables in my system, but I get fewer
artifacts sharpening the reduced TIFF rather than the JPEG.   I may
need to experiment with lower USM settings on my JPEGs, but given my
scanner's good somewhat limited capabilities (FS2710) , I'm very happy
with the workflow of TIFF>resize/resample >sharpen>compress.

Ken Durling

Visit my new easier-to-browse PhotoSIG portfolio:

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


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.