Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] scan comparison
From: "jahudson" <jahudson@direct.ca>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:41:03 -0700

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01BE8C1E.2082C0A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Francesco=20
  To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us=20
  Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 11:17 AM
  Subject: [Leica] scan comparison


  If some of you have a spare minute, could you please check out these =
two scans and
  tell me which one looks better OVERALL, in terms of color accuracy, =
skin tones, sharpness,=20
  contrast, brightness, etc.  Thanks a million!

  http://www.photorealm.com/F/sharon01.jpg
  http://www.photorealm.com/F/sharon02.jpg


  Francesco
  fls@san.rr.com

  Is there any advantage to having both files at 1350dpi when 72dpi is =
the maximum resolution most computer screens can cope with?
  Of the two images, sharon02 is my preference. The facial skin tone in =
sharon01 is a bit washed out but the skin tone of the chest and arms in =
01 I find is more realistic than that in 02. Would it be possible to =
bring the facial skin tone in 01 up to that of the chest and arms in 01. =
If that was possible, I would much prefer 01 over 02. As 01 stands right =
now I think that the folds in, and the texture of, the skin in 01 is =
more lifelike than in 02.  =20

  jh =20


- ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01BE8C1E.2082C0A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:fls@san.rr.com" title=3Dfls@san.rr.com>Francesco</A> =
</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us"=20
  =
title=3Dleica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.=
us</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, April 21, 1999 =
11:17=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Leica] scan =
comparison</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If some of you have a spare minute, =
could you=20
  please check out these two scans and</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>tell me which one looks better =
OVERALL, in terms=20
  of color accuracy, skin tones, sharpness, </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>contrast, brightness, etc.&nbsp; =
Thanks a=20
  million!</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.photorealm.com/F/sharon01.jpg">http://www.photorealm.c=
om/F/sharon01.jpg</A></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.photorealm.com/F/sharon02.jpg">http://www.photorealm.c=
om/F/sharon02.jpg</A></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Francesco</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:fls@san.rr.com">fls@san.rr.com</A></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Is there any advantage to having both files at 1350dpi when 72dpi =
is the=20
  maximum resolution most computer screens can cope with?</DIV>
  <DIV>Of the two images, sharon02 is my preference. The facial skin =
tone in=20
  sharon01 is a bit washed out but the skin tone of the chest and arms =
in 01 I=20
  find is&nbsp;more realistic than that in 02. Would it be possible to =
bring the=20
  facial skin tone&nbsp;in 01 up to that of the chest and arms in 01. If =
that=20
  was possible, I would much prefer 01 over 02. As 01 stands right now I =
think=20
  that the folds in, and the texture of, the skin in 01 is more lifelike =
than in=20
  02.   </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>jh&nbsp; </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01BE8C1E.2082C0A0--