Kaj Haulrich wrote:
I found that too. I got better B+W pictures by scanning the original B+W source in colour and then using gimp to covert to greyscale. I sure don't know why that is unless the answer is that a colour scan, of necessity , grabs much more real data with which any programmes can work with and convert back to B+W. Just a guess.
Well John, now I'm learning to scan my old B/W negatives using GIMP's acquire function. Xsane seems to work perfectly so far. Of course I had to do a lot of experimenting first. One thing that bothers me though is that I have to scan at resolution 1200 in order to reasonably large pictures. But the quality is quite amazing. And it seems to work best scanning with full color range rather than standard negative. Wonder why.
The choice of dpi seems to be a function of size of source area over degree of enlargement and therefore if for arguement's sake you want to extract an area in a picture the size of a postage stamp, but you want to enlarge it and use it again in another setting then it is necessary to choose a high dpi rate, naturally. That always supposes that the source of that postage size area has enough definition to allow for enlargement without undue degradation.
I found I really did need a lot of CPU power to do all this. There is a hell of a lot of number crunching in image work, especially when you want to be getting on with scanning and sending print files to the printer as well. One reason why I'm contemplating AMD64 cpu's next.
John
--
John Richard Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
