Jon
I have been scanning into sRGB. I'll be using these scans on the web
ultimately so I assumed that was the way to go. I also leave the scanner
on all the time so the warmup thing is not an issue.
I haven't looked over Margulis much yet, or had time to try any of the
suggestions people on the list have made. I may also my need to rethink
what I'm really trying to accomplish.
I looked again at some of the things I did and I've been trying to
recall what the scenes looked like *when I took the photographs* IOW,
if I start out with a dull scene, can I really expect it to look much
better after scanning? :-) If I can get to where my scans are a fairly
close approximation to what I started with, I'll be a lot happier.
At this point I'm probably better off than I could be. If I was scanning
and had both the highs and lows gone, ( whites blown out, shadows with
no detail) there wouldn't be much I could do to fix things.
Face it, if it was easy, everyone would be doing it...
--
Jim
Jon wrote:
>
> Well, Margulis is a can of worms, in my opinion, unless you have a CMYK
> workflow. One thing that might help is to set your output to sRGB in
> Vuescan. sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when
> scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why. Also make sure your
> scanner is warmed up properly.
>
> Jon
>
> --- Jim Sharp <jsharp@illicom.net> wrote:
> > Thanks to everyone who replied to this!
> >
> > I downloaded the Margulis .pdf files suggested and will study them
> > closely. I'm hoping that will help. I also intent to try a few of the
> > adjustments in Vuescan that I've yet to experiment with.
> >
> > I'll let you all know how I fare...
> >
> > --
> > Jim
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
