Mário writes ...
English is not my native language and sometimes I
have problems with theexact meaning of the words.
we all should learn to read between the lines :o)
Putting the question with an example:
step 0 (12 bits) = step 0 (16 bits)
step 2000 (12 bits) = step 32000 (16 bits)
Teixeira
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: michael shaffer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, 28 October, 2001 6:32 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: About 12 or 16 bits
| Mário writes ...
|
| English is not my native language and sometimes I
| have problems
The specifications from my Microtek Artixscan 4000t (the same as the
Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 in another box, except for the firmware) state a 36
bits depth. The Microtek scanning software (ScanWizard Pro) allows the
choice between RGB 24 and RGB 48 bits. It seems that the maximum resulting
I
suppose that the white point is converted from step 2^12 in the 12 bits
scale to 2^16 in the 16 bit scale and the intermediary steps are just
interpolated (without any gain in the image quality). Am I right?
Sorry, you're not right. I believe the 12 bit data is raw data with no
setpoints
Austin writes ...
I
suppose that the white point is converted from step 2^12 in the 12 bits
scale to 2^16 in the 16 bit scale and the intermediary steps are just
interpolated (without any gain in the image quality). Am I right?
Sorry, you're not right. I believe the 12 bit data is raw
It's my understanding that there are only two recognized TIF formats, one for 24-bit data and one for 48-bit data. So a scanner that outputs 36-bit data is going to actually give you a 48-bit TIF file, since the data won't fit into the 24-bit format. It would be nice if a standard existed for
on 10/27/01 11:41 AM, Austin Franklin wrote:
Sorry, you're not right. I believe the 12 bit data is raw data with no
setpoints at all...those have to be manually set in PS. The 12 data will be
high bit justified in the 16 bit word, and no intermediate values will be
interpolated and there
I
suppose that the white point is converted from step 2^12 in
the 12 bits
scale to 2^16 in the 16 bit scale and the intermediary steps are just
interpolated (without any gain in the image quality). Am I right?
Sorry, you're not right. I believe the 12 bit data is raw data with
]
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, 27 October, 2001 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: About 12 or 16 bits
|
|I
|suppose that the white point is converted from step 2^12 in
| the 12 bits
|scale to 2^16 in the 16
