Message-Id: <mailto:199507091112.GAA16669@library.wustl.edu> Date: Sat, 8 Jul 1995 22:19:45 -0600 From: Kurt Foss <mailto:kfoss@MURROW.JOURNALISM.WISC.EDU> Subject: Re: 2400 dpi slide vs. 600 dpi photo scans To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB
At 3:32 AM 7/9/95, Francis Huang wrote: >Hi everyone.
>
>I am very curious as to what type of scan would give a better,
>clearer picture:
No contest, all other things being equal, including the quality of the material being scanned and the skill of the operator. Scanning from the film is better if for no other reason than the print is another generation removed from the original. But in addition, the capability of most desktop film scanners to hold detail -- particularly in shadow areas -- far exceeds the capabilities of all but the most expensive flatbed scanners, and probably even those, too, under most conditions. If the scan isn't good to begin with, all the Photoshop magic isn't gonna improve it to the point of where a good initial scan would take it.
What is your intended use of these images -- that's also a key factor. What are your needs and quality concerns/requirements? Perhaps you can live with the results of a flatbed scanner -- such as scanning for-position-only images in layouts or small image applications where highest quality isn't a top priority versus cost.
But in terms of what's "better" in quality terms, the choice is rather easy.
~ Kurt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~my vitals~~~~~~~~> KURT FOSS * U_of Wisconsin-Madison * School of Journalism and Mass Comm. 5020 Vilas, Communication Hall * 821 University Avenue * Madison, WI 53706 Email: mailto:kfoss@murrow.journalism.wisc.edu * kfoss@itis.com * CIS: 70541,1040 Phone: Voice 608-263-3391 * FAX 608-262-1361 * Home 608-271-1210 Technology Editor, NPPA Electronic Photojournalism Workshop EPW7 Sept. 8-16 WWW1: ONline WISCONSIN> http://www.journalism.wisc.edu/olw-home WWW2: NPPA> http://sunsite.unc.edu/nppa ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-30-~~~~~~~~~~~~