Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/07/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Darrell, Excellent info from Henning, Tina, et al. Thanks! Scan dpi is not the same as print dpi. Since I have the full up Genuine Fractals, which you have too, I scan everything at full res., 2800x2500 pixels or so at 2700 dpi. (100%) (about 26 Mb from my Coolscan III) and after getting the pic just right in Photoshop, save files in .stn format. That way, I'm saving 6 - 8 mb files to disk. That avoids introducing bazaar aliasing artifacts in the original scan rendering, which can happen unpredictably at lower resolution scans. (That might be the most important aspect of the higher [2400+ dpi] res scanners - not the increased per line detail.) I then choose the print (or pixel) dimensions with the GF interface when opening the file. I've been using 360 l/mm as an even fraction of the printer's 1440 res, like Steve does, though I don't see any difference between that and 300 dpi., which I used to use. Just makes sense that it's easier for the driver to process. Using the Photoshop algorithms on a tif file might be just as good for this degree of resizing, but then you're saving much larger source files. The key is to scan at 100% @ 4000 dpi. if you want all the res the machine can provide. Otherwise, by requesting 4000, or 1440, at the print dimensions, you are creating huge files that contain no additional info, and your poor computer will plotz. I used to scan 2700 dpi at the actual pixel dimensions I needed (say, 25% of max., or 700 pixels on one dimension) before I had a printer and was just doing web display. Got crisper images than if I resized from max res in Photoshop. Haven't compared that to the GF resizing. Might still be better to scan at low res for web display, but what a pain! Much nicer to have one file to work from. CP - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html