Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] Re: 16 to 8bit conversion - impact on editing
From: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@ix.netcom.com>
> If you want to save space without sacrificing quality,
> convert to JPEG2000, not 8bpc TIFF.
I would agree, IF I wanted/needed to keep the 16bit files. But I'm
thinking that one of two things is likely to happen: either future
scanning will improve on what I've done, justifying a rescan, or the
quality difference for most scans is not enough to worry about it. The
JPG2k approach still requires extra steps, since I need the 8bit file
handy for sending out. We thought about the risks... an occasional scan
that would have to be redone to allow major changes... and decided we
would just redo them from scratch. If I'm right, that would never
happen but even if I'm wrong, the differences will not matter for 99% of
sales/uses. I'm more worried about the next, great scanner that will
tempt me to want to redo them all!
Switching from 16 to 8 would not only free up space but simplify the
workflow. I wanted to weigh these advantages against any potential
risks, given that we do little PS work on the files.
Ed Verkaik
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
|
