>> JPEG plays such absolute havoc with images that I'd never use any JPEGS >> to try and compare scanners. Download time or no download time, only >> uncompressed or lossless formats should be used if you're using the >> images for knocking copy... You know that, I know that and goodness knows how often it's been written here, but sadly to no avail. But "things are a changing" Ian Lyons http://welcome.to/computerdarkroom ==================================================================== The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans ILyons
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans bjs
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 sc... sirius
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS40... Richard
- Re: Group Scan site has posted ... Rob Geraghty
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS40... Rob Geraghty
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 sc... ILyons
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans cjcronin
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans bjs
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans Tony Sleep
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 sc... Rob Geraghty
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS40... Tony Sleep
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 sc... bjs
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 sc... photoscientia
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS40... Rob Geraghty
- On the SS4000 (was: Group Scan site has posted SS400... Peter Besenbruch
- re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans Alan Womack
- Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans Melba's Mail