ran before the problem occured or someone caught and corrected it for
the print edition.
Michael O
Topic: [filmscanners] Re: Scanning with too much resolution?
(was:PSsharpening...)
.=.
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 23:48:43
I took a close look at those two horse images in the PDF file on page 280,
by magnifying the PDF as much as possible, so that the individual pixels
were easily visible as squares. What I found was that the image that he said
had been scanned at a higher resolution was actually rendered in the
You are certainly right, Paul. Good catch. If Margulis is such an expert,
how could he let that one slip by?
On 8/18/02 2:48 AM, Paul D. DeRocco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I took a close look at those two horse images in the PDF file on page 280,
by magnifying the PDF as much as possible, so
I think the two images were published in reverse order relevant to the
caption.
...Bob
- Original Message -
From: Paul D. DeRocco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 11:48 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Scanning with too much resolution
But the point of the caption is that an image that is scanned at higher
resolution may look softer than one scanned at lower resolution. The upper
one clearly looks softer, and it is the upper one that he says was scanned
at three times the resolution, yet it is also the upper one that has pixels
On 8/17/02 2:17 AM, Paul D. DeRocco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this an e-book or something? Or are the images online somewhere for free?
It's from Dan Margulis' book Professional Photoshop. A couple of the
chapters are available on the web. Earlier in this thread, Preston Earle
posted a
