Art wrote: >Common wisdom is that scanning at the highest optical resolution and >then downsampling via a good program provides better results. I've found in the past that scanning at a resolution which produces an image on the screen close to the required size means you can get a sharper jpeg for web use than scanning at maximum res and resampling. I suggested as much in this list, but got shouted down. My recent experience has been that resampling always means I have to sharpen afterwards. As Art suggests - try both and see what works for you. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
- RE: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Jack Phipps
- RE: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Jack Phipps
- Re: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Tony Sleep
- Re: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? RogerMillerPhoto
- Re: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? David
- RE: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? LAURIE SOLOMON
- Re: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Arthur Entlich
- Re: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? Rob Geraghty
- Re: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ? David