Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/04/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Having come from the film industry - staying true to the "original" has been the mantra. The test has been after scanning an image into the computer - does it look the same after output to film? Kodak had the best film scanner - the Genesis. But we are talking 4K sized images here at 24 frames per second - so it became a trade off between image quality and speed. 8 bit linear vs 10 bit log color space. At the beginning of digital film, the cost per frame was $9 per - 24 frames a second and one element could get quite costly. Many hours spent confirming that the output was as close to the same as the original. With external hard drives going for around $1 per gig now, file storage is not an issue, it is more of have much ram does one's computer have. Hate waiting for the image to update in Photoshop because the ram is too small. Have found that a dual processor, 1.5gig handles it well. With fire wire external drives. All about pipe size, isn't it? Jay Ignaszewski -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bonvini=optonline.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bonvini=optonline.net@leica-users.org]On Behalf Of nathan.wajsman@planet.nl Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 7:52 AM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Some new Leica photos ... Jay states that file size is not an issue for him, so my answer was based on that. The problem with JPEGs is not only the loss every time you save, but also the fact that if you later decide to do some further corrections, the result is much better if working from a 16-bit TIFF or PSD file than from an 8-bit JPEG. Nathan Nathan Wajsman Almere, Netherlands http://www.nathanfoto.com http://www.fotosevilla.com Print sales: http://www.photodeluge.com Image licensing: http://www.alamy.com/search-results.asp?qt=wajsman ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht ----- Van: SonC@aol.com Datum: woensdag, april 27, 2005 1:37 pm Onderwerp: Re: [Leica] Some new Leica photos ... > Hmmm. I don't save in TIFF as it takes up too much real estate on > my > drives. I save as high quality jpeg, usually around 300 ppi > (Negs, of course get a > much higher ppi). > > Then if I edit the shot, I save it as another name , preserving > the original > scan. Jpeg gets lossy if you save it over and over, so always > edit a > duplicate of the original scan. > > I also do any unsharp masking after the resizing and before I > "save for > web," remembering to tick the box "save icc profile." > > > Regards, > Sonny > http://www.sonc.com > Natchitoches, Louisiana > Oldest continuous settlement in La Louisiane > ?galit?, libert?, crawfish > > > > In a message dated 4/26/2005 11:41:28 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > nathan.wajsman@planet.nl writes: > Jay, > > You should always scan at the maximum optical resolution of your > scanner > and save the images as 16-bit TIFF files. Do all your corrections > and > sizing at this level, and then downsize for web display as the > very last > step. > > Nathan > > Jay wrote: > > > This is definitely a newbie question - what res/dpi do you scan > your 35mm > > negs for maximum effectiveness? > > File size is not an issue. > > > > Jay Ignaszewski > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information