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: Correct/best methods of scanning



Craig writes ...

> The question is: Is a better image produced from one method than
> the other?
> Is it wrong to have a large file then scale down? Or is the image slightly
> sharper, better resolved (or whatever the correct terminology may be...),
> any thoughts? Ideas? Anyone produced any tests?

  As others have mentioned, it is dependent on the scanning software (and
possibly the scanner) ... but let me give an example:  The software may
simply grab a RGB value independent of a neighboring color (i.e., take note
of how fast the scanks) ... whereas resampling with your editting software
^will^ take neighboring pixels into account.

cheerios ... shAf  :o)
Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland
www.micro-investigations.com (in progress)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.