I have recently spoken to various people about scanning and it appears that there are two methods of obtaining a scan for a specific size output (that we all use anyway!). If, for instance, a 10x8 image at 300ppi is required from a medium format film. Now this can be scanned at the exact output size required or the image can be scanned at the highest quality of the scanner, providing a much larger file than required, then resized/scaled to the required output size. I use both these options depending on whether I need the larger file later.
The question is: Is a better image produced from one method than the other? Is it wrong to have a large file then scale down? Or is the image slightly sharper, better resolved (or whatever the correct terminology may be...), any thoughts? Ideas? Anyone produced any tests? Craig Craig Auckland | Photographer [ Telephone ] +44 (0)7930 337 226 [ Facsimile ] +44 (0)7931 607 428 [ Electronic mail ] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Online portfolio ] www.aucklandphotographer.co.uk The studio, 17 Elton Road, Kingswood, Bristol, BS15 1NG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
