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: [filmscanners_Digest] hi bit

Hi Tom,

>>Why are high bit worksflows harder and take more time? Because of the
>>Photoshop limitations? Wouldn't a 16bit clean program relieve you of these
> Hello afx, I think the slowness is primarily due to the glacial speed that
> the scanner transfers data to the computer. Sometimes ten minutes just to
No on my box. Here the scanner is the slow part (FS4000), not the SCSI bus.

> much faster.  The other time consuming part is making the selection, you
> can't just reach for tools, you have to lasso your area to be fixed up, then
> apply the feathered selection, then do levels/curves adjustments on the
> selection.  Or else the other way is to use history erase.  either takes ten
> more steps (approximately) compared to using a simple dodge/burn tool.
> Still, IMHO, it gives a much better result because you can optimize the
> levels and curves for each section of an image, no limit, you can have
> everbody's faces, for example, individually leveled and curved and color
> corrected.
Sounds awfully complicated and sort of confirms my theses that the problem is
PS not having full 16bit support.

> I wish i knew of a program that allowed dodging/burning in 16 bit, do you?
Not on the Mac, only on the PC (see the other posts) ;-(
If PWP where available on the Mac, I would have bought one instead of the
Athlon box I am using now.

Andreas Siegert

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.