Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] RE: Repeated "Tonal correction", is it god?
- To: lexa@lexa.ru
- Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Repeated "Tonal correction", is it god?
- From: "Nagaraj, Ramesh" <Ramesh.Nagaraj@ca.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:58:57 -0500
- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
- Thread-index: AcLpl0FX4ef1bfr4SGmpLWING88VlwAAVtZw
- Thread-topic: [filmscanners] RE: Repeated "Tonal correction", is it god?
- Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk
shAf writes ...
> No ... the reason is why you scanned into 16bits.
> Again no ... assuming 16bits again. If 8bit channels, then yes, you'd
>want to get all tonal adjustments correct (as possible) with the scan
>software. However, I doubt anyone will notice a minor post-scan adj't with
>PS.
I am not able to clearly understand how that is related to bits/channel.
Could you please explain this?
Are you implying the following..
Because there is no extra to data to play with in case of 8bit/channel, its
good to do pre-scanning correction.
In case of 16bit/channel, there will be more data, so we can afford to waste
data during post-scan correction; thus no need to do pre-scan adjustments.
Thanks
Ramesh
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
|