our examples, one day. :-)
Best regards--LRA
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tony Sleep)
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
>Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 12:36 +0100 (BST)
>
>On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 01:41:02 +100
At 10:48 AM 7/20/01 +, Lynn wrote:
>Rafe wrote:
>
>>>The sky in the "Prarie" photo looks smooth as silk
>>>on my PC, with 24 bit video. With the screen set
>>>to "256 colors" I get topo maps in the sky.
>
>and Bob wrote:
>>Thanks Rafe. Mine looked smooth as silk too. I couldn't figure out >
At 10:48 AM 20/07/01 +, Lynn wrote:
>OK, I'm not exactly sure what's going on here, that one display set to
>factory specs (mine) shows posterization in an Internet JPEG, and two
>others (Rafe's and Bob's) do not.
>
>Should Internet picture postings come with the caveat, "Warning, This
>Pic
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 01:41:02 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> I can't think of a meaningful picture of grain
> aliasing. It could be described with a drawing, not with an real life
> scan
> because by nature it is random.
No, I have scans of the same neg showing the effect v
he throws it in my direction--I could use a
portable backup, and could keep up with the List while I'm fishing or on
vacation.
Best regards--LRA
>From: rafeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: fi
tings come with the caveat, "Warning, This
Picture Must Be Viewed At 48-Bits!"? That doesn't sound altogether
realistic, to me. :-)
Best regards--LRA
>From: "Bob Kehl - Kvernstoen, Kehl & Assoc." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To:
You can only do
this with a few programs, Picture Publisher 8 being one of them.
Best regards--LRA
>From: rafeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
>Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:41:23
Dan wrote:
>It was set to 16-bit (True Color), so I changed it to 24-bit (High Color)
>and rebooted. Still see the lines in the sky, but this is only a Dell
>Inspiron 3500 notebook PC with a NeoMagic MagicMedia 256AV card and a 14"
>LCD screen. No doubt something in that mix isn't up to snuff.
I had this problem for a while and nothing seemed to fix it until it went
away by itself. Doesn't seem to have to do with color bit-depth. Wish I could
be of more help.
John M.
>
> It was set to 16-bit (True Color), so I changed it to 24-bit (High Color)
> and rebooted. Still see the lines in t
At 11:33 AM 7/20/01 +1000, Rob wrote:
>Rafe wrote:
>>I'm willing to bet that Dan Honemann has his video
>>set to 256 colors ("indexed" color.)
>
>Some video drivers in Windows (particularly the generic Windows ones as
>opposed to OEM) only display 256 colours despite being set to 16bit or 24bit.
>
Rafe,
> I'm willing to bet that Dan Honemann has his video
> set to 256 colors ("indexed" color.)
It was set to 16-bit (True Color), so I changed it to 24-bit (High Color)
and rebooted. Still see the lines in the sky, but this is only a Dell
Inspiron 3500 notebook PC with a NeoMagic MagicMedia
Rafe wrote:
>I'm willing to bet that Dan Honemann has his video
>set to 256 colors ("indexed" color.)
Some video drivers in Windows (particularly the generic Windows ones as
opposed to OEM) only display 256 colours despite being set to 16bit or 24bit.
It was one reason I had to throw out a video
Thanks, Lynn! I look forward to whatever artifact samples you care to
share. :)
Dan
Robert,
> The old JPEG (not JPEG 2000) does code three channels
> Y, Cr, Cb. The channels Cr and Cb are downsampled.
> Then each channel is divided in blocks of 8x8. For
> each such block you do a Discret Cosinus Transform
> (DCT), devide each of the 64 resulting values by one
> of 64 numbers def
- Original Message -
From: rafeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:00 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
>
>
> Hold everything! Do you mean, "Prairie, Northern Tibet?"
>
> I
At 10:08 PM 7/19/01 +, Lynn Allen wrote:
>Hi, Dan--
>
>That looks like "Posterization" to me (at least, tha's whut ah calls it! :-)
>--cf definitions (-:|:-) ). I'd say it's probably a result (in this case,
>anyway) of pushing the sizing and JPEG compression too far. A good reference
>is La
At 05:44 PM 7/19/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Lynn, Rafe, Rob and others:
>
>One thing I've always been curious about is what causes the topographical
>map type of lines you see in the blue sky portion of this image:
>
>http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~taiji/gallery/t21.htm
>
>???
>
>I see this sort of artifac
om: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lynn Allen
> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:11 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
> >
> >
> > Dan wrote:
> >
> > &
Dan wrote:
>One thing I've always been curious about is what causes the topographical
>map type of lines you see in the blue sky portion of this image:
>http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~taiji/gallery/t21.htm
>I see this sort of artifact a lot in jpegs on the web. Is this what is
>called "jaggies?" Do
Lynn wrote:
> Hoo, boy, that *would* be useful! Presently, every definition is
> about a half-click away from the next guy's definition. If I had
> a website, I'd give it a go (I've got *plenty* of examples!)--
> maybe some kind-sprited, web-savvy member will do it?
I'd be happy to put things onl
--- Dan Honemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thing I've always been curious about is what
> causes the topographical
> map type of lines you see in the blue sky portion of
> this image:
The old JPEG (not JPEG 2000) does code three channels
Y, Cr, Cb. The channels Cr and Cb are downsampled.
emann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
>Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:44:41 -0400
>
>Lynn, Rafe, Rob and others:
>
>One thing I've always b
ehalf Of Lynn Allen
> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:11 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
> >
> >
> > Dan wrote:
> >
> > >Is there an online tutorial/FAQ/glossary somewhere that shows
&
Lynn, Rafe, Rob and others:
One thing I've always been curious about is what causes the topographical
map type of lines you see in the blue sky portion of this image:
http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~taiji/gallery/t21.htm
???
I see this sort of artifact a lot in jpegs on the web. Is this what is
ca
nt: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:11 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: image samples of digital artifacts
>
>
> Dan wrote:
>
> >Is there an online tutorial/FAQ/glossary somewhere that shows
> image samples
> >of various digital artifacts (e
Dan wrote:
>Is there an online tutorial/FAQ/glossary somewhere that shows image samples
>of various digital artifacts (e.g., banding, grain-aliasing, jaggies,
>etc.)?
>
>I'm a newbie to all this, and Tony's glossary at halftone is a help but
>doesn't show pics. Here, I think, sample images woul
Rob wrote (re grain-aliasing)--
>The closest analogy is the moire patterns you get when scanning offset
>printed magazine pictures with a flatbed at certain ppi settings.
This makes the exact point of my earlier post--that's not how I'd describe
it, at all (and the Acer can grain-alias with th
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Dan Honemann wrote:
> Is there an online tutorial/FAQ/glossary somewhere that shows image samples
> of various digital artifacts (e.g., banding, grain-aliasing, jaggies, etc.)?
You mean, like a Madame-Tussaud's wax museum of
film scanner horrors? Sounds ghastly.
Just b
"Dan Honemann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there an online tutorial/FAQ/glossary somewhere that shows image
samples
> of various digital artifacts (e.g., banding, grain-aliasing, jaggies,
etc.)?
I should put some examples of jaggies on my web site. Thankfully, Nikon
finally
seems to have fix
29 matches
Mail list logo
