ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












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

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

[filmscanners] RE: opinions? Reviews? of Primefilm 1800 ?



>Bits equals available grey levels per pixel
That is nice; is this also true when one works in color as opposed to
grayscale or black and white?  Would I be wrong to generalize this and say
"bits equal potentially available tonal levels per pixel" in which the tone
can be any hue or color?

However, the question in issue, I believe, was not the meaning of "bits" but
if "bit depth" was intended to be a measure of "dynamic range" or of
"density range, of the "contrast range" from white point limit to black
point limit or of the ability to discriminate between shades or tones within
that contrast range, or more generally between the quantity of informational
data regarding highlights and shadows and the quality of that information in
terms of determining details precisely within that contrast range.  While I
am inclined to agree that from your definition or mine of "bits" the
reference of "bit depth" should be apparant, it does not appear to be in
regards to its actual usage, which I believe is what gave rise to the
discussion.

-----Original Message-----
From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of dickbo
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 3:43 AM
To: laurie@advancenet.net
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: opinions? Reviews? of Primefilm 1800 ?


Bits equals available grey levels per pixel

----- Original Message -----
From: "Laurie Solomon" <laurie@advancenet.net>
To: <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:22 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: opinions? Reviews? of Primefilm 1800 ?


>Another misconception...though equally as common...the number of bits the
converter
>has, have nothing to do with the scanners ability to capture any particular
>density range.

Just out of curiousity and in simple layman's terms, what do the number of
bits that the converter has  have to do with if not the density range? How
does it impact on what is captured?

Austin, I am asking a serious question here out of my lack of knowledge and
sure would appreciate a good discussion in layman's terms so that I can
understand what is being said without having to hire an engineer to
interpret. It has always been my understanding, rightly or wrongly, that the
higher the number of bits the more detailed or refined the informational
date captured from the original that is transmitted as data in the digital
file with respect to highlight and/or shadow detail with the density range
figure represetning the range of contrast that can be captured.  In other
words, "dynamic range" representing the contrast range of the capture's
capabilities, while the bit depth represented the quality of the data
captured within that range particularly the extremes.  If this is wrong,
please explain where and how it is and provide me with a more accurrate
description (but once again, I urge you to try and do it in non-engineering
terms if possible).


-----Original Message-----
From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 7:13 AM
To: laurie@advancenet.net
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: opinions? Reviews? of Primefilm 1800 ?



> However, it is rated with 3.2 dynamic range, which is a bit low for a 14
> bit/channel.

Even though they may call it "dynamic range", it is DENSITY range.  Another
misconception...though equally as common...the number of bits the converter
has, have nothing to do with the scanners ability to capture any particular
density range.

Austin

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

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



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

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



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.