![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() alex8735 wrote: I would be glad to help. This can easily be done in Photoshop...the quality of the result just depends on how good the scanner is. Just mail ) me the scans and I will se what I can do. A panaorama stitching tool is not necessary because it is only required to get rid of lens distortion which does not occur in scans. Excellent. My scanner should get here sometime next week; I'll send out the scans shortly thereafter. You want the highest-density scans possible, in original bitmap rather than JPEG form? Those are going to be some big files; the scanner claims 1200 dpi, and some of the pictures are full pages. Johan Larson |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
High resolution is always good. The files do not necessarily have to be
bitmaps. Best quality jpeg files should not have any visible quality drawbacks....but I don't mind big files either. For the best possible scans you should scan in the nativ resolution of the scanner (no interpolation to higher or lower resolutions). Any post processing by the scanner or its software should be turned off (like color correction) because Photoshop is better at it;-) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you plan to publish on the web, you need not bother with the great
size of files your scanner's full resolution will produce. 72 dpi is about right for the end product you will need although since you are going to edit in Photoshop maybe scanning at 150dpi and then scalling down in photoshop will produce better end results. In any case, you will be scaning from magazines and if you consider that the top limit for any such source will most probably never exceed 300dpi (which is the max that wil have been used at the printer's originally) you should not really concern yourself with more than that. I would only use higher resultion than this if I were scanning a high quality original photo print or negative. wrote: alex8735 wrote: I would be glad to help. This can easily be done in Photoshop...the quality of the result just depends on how good the scanner is. Just mail ) me the scans and I will se what I can do. A panaorama stitching tool is not necessary because it is only required to get rid of lens distortion which does not occur in scans. Excellent. My scanner should get here sometime next week; I'll send out the scans shortly thereafter. You want the highest-density scans possible, in original bitmap rather than JPEG form? Those are going to be some big files; the scanner claims 1200 dpi, and some of the pictures are full pages. Johan Larson |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Re resolution: The most important point is that you're scanning a
printed picture, i.e. a screen. Depending on what you intend to do with your scan, there is a big chance that the result will show an unsightly moiré pattern. If your scanner software has an "unscreen" feature (the name of this function varies with the software), then check it and insert the screen frequency (probably 150 lpi for a magazine). With some programs, this function works as advertized, sometimes it does not. If it does and you don't want to enlarge the picture, there's no point in scanning with more than 300dpi (or even 72 dpi for monitor display). If your scanner software doesn't have this function, then things can get tricky. Usually you'll get the best the results scaning with very high resolution and downscale afterwards. This approach requires a bit try and error. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
For post processing it is important to have a high resolution. This has
nothing to do with the final result which of course has to be smaller to fit the screen in the end. By the way, screens do not have a fixed resolution of 72dpi. Most screens nowadays will be running near 100dpi but this depends on the resolution set by the user. The term dpi only really applies to printing. I am quite sure that National Geographic prints at a higher resolution than 300dpi (my printer at home does 600dpi). I still recommend not to use any kind of scanner demoiré features because scanner software usually is not as good as Photoshop. Each post processing step takes information from the original leaving less options for the guy putting it all together in the end. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() alex8735 wrote: I still recommend not to use any kind of scanner demoiré features because scanner software usually is not as good as Photoshop. Each post processing step takes information from the original leaving less options for the guy putting it all together in the end. I guess the ideal scenario would be a raw-output mode for the scanner, and a free Photoshop plugin to read the output files. Johan Larson |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
alex8735 schrieb:
For post processing it is important to have a high resolution. Agreed. However, it's all a question of economics. There's definitely no point in scanning an entire magazine page with 1200 dpi, which will create something like 500 MB of data, then sending this data through a modem line, then working on this huge file, only to have it downscaled at the end to something which will be displayed as a 15cm x 10cm picture on a web site. Scan as needed. I am quite sure that National Geographic prints at a higher resolution than 300dpi (my printer at home does 600dpi). For line art, high resolution is crucial. I can even tell the difference between 600dpi and 1200dpi. However for half tones (aka pictures), there's no use to set the resolution higher than twice the printed screen frequency. Note: This is the *theoretic* maximum of data that can be reproduced when you rasterize a picture! Practically, with most pictures, even a factor 1.4 will yield perfect results. Now as most magazines print with a screen of around 150lpi, the raw material is never higher than 300dpi. (Art reproduction is a different story because they use finer screens. And FM rasters are yet a different story altogether.) I still recommend not to use any kind of scanner demoiré features because scanner software usually is not as good as Photoshop. Replace "usually" by "sometimes", the I agree. Again, it's a question of economics: If you want to demoiré in Photoshop, you indeed need a high resolution scan. Stefan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|