User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  24
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: scanning slides

  1. #41
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    23,544
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Easy! It's for you to find one day after several years of using the scanner and to open and say:
    "Oh-h-h! I didden know that!" After which you lose it again fairly forthwith.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  2. #42
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Mar 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,173
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What settings would be recommended for colour 48 bit or 24 bit?
    Resolution? ?dpi
    Gear: Panasonic Lumix FZ200 / Huawei Mate 20 / LR 5, PSE 12, Da Vinci resolve

    "I may be crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."

  3. #43
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    23,544
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    None! AbsoLUTEly nONe!

    O-hhhh, whyyyyy? I hear you ask.

    Well, what are you scanning? A slide? A negative? What's its dynamic range like?

    As a general rule only, it has been proposed that slides can be scanned at 24-bit color depth, while
    negatives can use (well, the next level up) 48-bit, due to a neg's ability to record a higher dynamic range.

    Now, DPI??? (DPI can stand as a parameter of resolution, but then so can bit depth.) Well, now that you have the scanner, why
    don't you try a number of trial scans? Take a slide/neg or a couple thereof. Apply a standard procedure to reproduce each one.
    For example, say, try a particular slide; choose a color depth (make it 24-bit for starters), now scan it at a couple of different resolutions.
    Maybe try 1500 DPI, then a 2000 DPI, and maybe a 2500 DPI. Assess each one. Try the whole lot at a higher bit-depth.
    ...and so on...
    ...

    After a while you will begin to get a hang of things. Of course, post up a result or two, ask Qs about them, and go from there.
    Contrary to hype, there is no hard set of rules that "guarantee" results.

    I await your findings

  4. #44
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    16,846
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by landyvlad View Post
    What settings would be recommended for colour 48 bit or 24 bit?
    Resolution? ?dpi
    To access all the information within a 48 bit image file, you need a good graphics card that can I/O 48 bit and then a monitor that can display 48 bit. Then if you want to print, you need a 48 bit printer. The vast majority of monitors and even printers these days are 24 bit (true colour), so unless you have huge plans for the scanned files into the future, scanning at 48 bit doesn't mean a better image on your monitor or in print, at this time. You can get 48 bit printers now. Having said that a lot of the newer monitors can support 32 bit colour, and yes you can buy 48 bit graphics cards for reasonable prices, but to see true 48 bit colour you need every step of the process to be able to support 48 bit colour.

    So really it is your choice which you use, but do your research into the processing hardware you have and see if it can support 48 bit, first. Just cause you can scan at 48 bit, doesn't mean you have to, 24 bit is damn good quality. Most current digital cameras are between 12-16 bit
    Last edited by ricktas; 20-07-2015 at 7:43am.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  5. #45
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Mar 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,173
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok thank you.

    I have done a couple of films so far. Pleased with the unit.
    After doing lots of googling I used settings of 48 bit with 3200 dpi.

    I did try higher DPI settings but there was a lot of noise, and no perceived advantages.
    Didn't know that lower than 3200 dpi would be better?

    Given you comments I will go to 24 bit in future for slides.
    These aren't the quality that would justify 48bit in the first instance anyway.

    If I was going to post some samples on here for comment, what format / size would I use?
    Currently they are in .tif format (and huge) of course.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by landyvlad; 20-07-2015 at 11:19am.

  6. #46
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Mar 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,173
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by landyvlad View Post

    Given you comments I will go to 24 bit in future for slides.
    These aren't the quality that would justify 48bit in the first instance anyway.

    If I was going to post some samples on here for comment, what format / size would I use?
    Currently they are in .tif format (and huge) of course.

    Thanks.
    Obviously I want people to see what quality I am getting.


    Anyone?

  7. #47
    Ausphotography irregular Mark L's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Nov 2010
    Location
    magical Mudgee
    Posts
    21,586
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=landyvlad;1305179

    If I was going to post some samples on here for comment, what format / size would I use?
    [/QUOTE]
    What format / size are you allowed to post any photo directly to AP?
    To state the obvious, JPEG at 1024 on the longest side, unless you are linking from somewhere else. But you know that.

  8. #48
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    23,544
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by landyvlad View Post
    Obviously I want people to see what quality I am getting.


    Anyone?
    LV. Do this:
    1. Post a normal sized image suitable for AP as a JPG (all usual stuff) and then
    2. Make a couple - or a couple more - 100% crops of particular areas you want to show details of.
    3. Post them up in the usual way for AP.

    Now, I'm getting to your of what a 100% crop is:

    A: Using the likes of Photoshop, view you image at "Full Size". Take your selection tool and copy out interesting sections you'd like
    to post as illustrations. Paste these into new documents and save as jpegs. When you make your selections, you can set the size you copy
    out, eg 500x500 pixels.

    Now the good thing about doing this is that you can take those copied of sections from ANY file - large TIFFs or anything. You can save the
    selections as jpegs anyway and... Bingo!

    Oh, now remember, make the selections NOT TOO large, so that you save them WITHOUT re-sizing. If you re-size, they will
    no longer be 100% crops.
    Am.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •