Hi Jeff ... I did some scanning this weekend and the experience was a little different than your explanation.
Using the Nikon 4000dpi scanner allows for 14 bit greyscale, not 16 bit. Perhaps not a significant difference. Tiff clearly supports (or at least allows files) in the 14 bit (16 bit) range. Unfortunately, in order to do any serious photoshop work, the files must be converted to 8 bit. This is in PS 7.0 ... maybe other software allows more flexibility at 16 bit. Still, a number of corrections and modifications can be made in the 16 bit format, but using layers is out .... gotta convert to 8 bit for that. RGB scanning is definitely not worth the effort with a scanner like the Nikon (or similar/better scanners) from what I can see. The image is definitely "muddier" to my eye and has to be converted to greyscale anyway. It seems that the converted image from RGB to greyscale does not look as good as one scanned directly in greyscale. The waste of disk space is substantial. The 14 bit greyscale scans yield 40+ mb files. The rgb scans yields 135+ mb ... definitely not worth it for the results obtained. Thanks for your advice and suggestions. shel belinkoff Jeff Jonsson wrote: > > Actually being a scanning expert for my job I will try a response... > > The Imacon Flextight is essentially a drum scanner, and as such has a > pretty good DMAX, 4.6 for the 646 to be precise. And, I'm not sure > (because it doesn't say in the B&H big book) but I think it can do up to > 16-bit grayscale. Of course TIFF only supports 8-bit grayscale, so if > you're scanning with TIFF files as your format of choice for the > end-result file, I wouldn't scan in RGB. You'll end up with a file > that's more than 3 times as large, and won't really gain any tonality > you won't get with a 16, or even 12 bit grayscale image. Obviously you > can only work with the 12 or 16 bit in Photoshop, and save as PSD, but > if you're down-converting to 8-bit grayscale for your TIFF, then > scanning in RGB is overkill by an order of magnitude. The Nikon Coolscan > 8000 scans at 4000dpi, and again, can produce a 12-bit grayscale image. > Also, it has a DMAX of 4.2, it should pull out quite a bit of shadow > detail. > > My opinion, as someone who has overseen the scanning of over 20,000 > grayscale images at high resolution, RGB is just not useful, and you > won't get a better tonal range by doing it. In fact, if anything, you'll > just get a muddier image, and waste disk space. > > Shel, please contact me directly if you need any more advice. I work at > the Marriott Library, at the University of Utah in the Digital > Technologies division. One of my primary job duties is managing workflow > of large-scale scanning operations. If you want to see some of our > output visit this website: http://www.lib.utah.edu/digital/digcol.html > > Here at my shop, we use the Nikon Coolscan 8000, a Coolscan LS-2000, two > CreoScitex Eversmart Jazz+ flatbeds (true 2900 dpi across a 16"x20" > bed), a Leica S1 Digital scanning camera (effective 25MP) a Zeutschel > 10000 A1 bookscanner, and some other assorted scanning devices, so I > have some pretty good experience with high end equipment. > > Thanks, > Jeff Jonsson > Digitization Systems Analyst, Marriott Library > 801.585.5587 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:01 PM > To: PDML > Subject: Scanning Question > > Hi gang ... > > Over the next few weeks I'm going to attempt scanning a lot > of conventional B&W negs. I have heard a number of > conflicting opinions on the best way to do this. Most > comments center around whether to scan in RGB or greyscale. > Greyscale would be nice as I could save some space, but if > RBG will give higher quality results, I'll bite the bullet. > > I have scanned using both methods before, although with the help of a > friend who did most of the work and setup, so I'm still pretty much > uneducated and inexperienced wrt the subtleties. > > Scanners used will be an Imacon Flextight 626 (I believe > that's the number) and the Nikon Coolscan IV 4000dpi unit, > if that makes any difference. > > Thanks for any help, > > shel
