Anthony wrote:
In theory you can also downsample in one step and unsharp mask once, but
then you must calculate the proper radius based on the number of pixels lost
and unsharp mask up front. For example, if you downsample in one step of
500%, you'd use a radius of 4.9 pixels or so. I
Al writes:
Maybe I have missed it in an earlier post but, if
you are using your normal technique of halving the
image size, what are the unsharp mask settings you
use as a default?
Strength of 98, radius of 0.7, threshold of 2. Of course, this is a highly
subjective setting. I do note
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Strength of 98, radius of 0.7, threshold of 2. Of course, this is a highly
subjective setting. I do note that very small images usually require less
unsharp masking than very large images to get visually similar results, but
since the distinctions
Many thanks to those who answered my question on firmware.
TH
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message
I use strength 100, radius 1, threshold 1 for the
Epson 2450 and next for every halving of image size
(linearly) 25 to 30 works well. If your scanner adds
its own sharpening, the initial value should be less
for strength. The fine detail just seems to bubble up
through the various downsizings.
I find that the first sharpening, that applied
to the image from the scanner, needs much larger
strength and radius values than the second and
later sharpenings. Do you turn on sharpening in
the scanner?
No, I don't. You never know when you'll need an image _without_ sharpening
(remember,
