Erwin, if you're scanning prints for your website there's really no need to
scan at greater than 240-300 ppi. More doesn't equal better. In fact,
scanning at 100 ppi will result in screen size images nearly equivalent to
the original prints. So a 4"x6" print scanned at 100 ppi will deliver a
screen sized image measuring only a little larger than 4"x6" on most
monitors, at an actual resolution of 400x600 ppi.
Unless you're wanting to scan at higher resolutions for archival purposes or
for printing, this will save you a lot of time and trouble. And relatively
low compression will still deliver excellent quality JPEGs.
Another trick is, as a last step after any other image editing such as
resampling, color correction, etc., is to apply unsharp masking or some form
of sharpening. This smooths out spikey histograms. No point in applying
unsharp masking earlier in the process because it'll have to be repeated
later, which can produce excessive noise.
-----------
Lex Jenkins
-------------------------------------------------------------
Visit "Vistas Tejas" at http://www.photoscene.com/lexjenkins/
<a href="http://www.photoscene.com/lexjenkins/";>Visit Vistas Tejas</a>
======================================================================
From: Erwin Voogt <erwin.voogt@xxxxxx>
The pictures are scanned with the Agfa Snapscan 50e at 1200 DPI, which
results in images of about 1600x1060 pixels. For the web pages the pictures
are reduced in size to 800x530 or 400x600, with a severe jpeg compression.
It is hard to find a good balance between image quality and image size...
http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/photovoogt/index.html
Bye,
Erwin Voogt
Utrecht, The Netherlands.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|