On 8/12/02 10:16 PM, "Tony Terlecki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Firstly any scanner profiling software will probably produce a similar
> result - basically they all function by scanning an IT8 target and build a
> profile from that. I have done this with EZColor and the results are an
> improve
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 05:35:39PM +0200, Alex Zabrovsky wrote:
> Has anybody have a chance to try Kodak's COLORFLOW ICC color profiles
> builder software to calibrate his scanners ? (especially would be interested
> in IV ED calibration experience).
> I found quite rave review of this thing from
>I found impossible to do Load Selection into the original image window
>without making Save Selection (choosing All option) prior to that (in Edge
>Mask image window).
Curious. I regularly use and have an action for this procedure. After creating the
edge mask in the "filename copy" window, f
BTW, recently some of our fellows pointed me to the Bruce Fraser's article
on creativepro.com
taking the approach of two-step sharpening. I assume some of more
knowledgeable PS users here are more or less familiar with this technique so
will probably be able to clarify something for me.
Basically
>Well, if the G450 works this way, I assume my G550 would do the same, right
>?
>So does that mean that the image itself is 24 color in PS while the 32 are
>only relevant for monitor's appearance ?
>
>Regards,
>Alex Z
I'd say it is only relevant for the display adapter's performance.
As I unders
Well, if the G450 works this way, I assume my G550 would do the same, right
?
So does that mean that the image itself is 24 color in PS while the 32 are
only relevant for monitor's appearance ?
Regards,
Alex Z
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behal
Has anybody have a chance to try Kodak's COLORFLOW ICC color profiles
builder software to calibrate his scanners ? (especially would be interested
in IV ED calibration experience).
I found quite rave review of this thing from Bruce Fraser using it on
LS-4000. According to him it would noticeably i
Oh great, why this idea didn't come up in my mind earlier ?? :-)
I'll surely try this out today evening.
Regards,
Alex Z
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shunith Dutt
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 2:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [fi
Alex..
You can always increase the font size on your desktop 1600x1200 gives
you a much larger area to play with... (increase font size by going to...
Settings -> Advanced ->General).
Cheers...
SD
- Original Message -
From: "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTE
You're certainly correct Henk, thanks for pointing out to this fact.
Frankly, so far I didn't notice any visible artifacts caused by that which
is the reason I wasn't aware about the problem. Strange.
I tried 1600x1200, both monitor and graphics card handle this resolution
well, but the text is to
>I have my monitor usually set to 1280x1024,...
The display resolution of 1280 x 1024 has an aspect ratio of 5:4 instead of
4:3 like most of the others.
Photos displayed in this resolution will look squeezed. You better use the
resolution 1280 x 960 (or 1600 x 1200).
With kind regards,
Henk de J
Following your discussion which I find quite interesting I would like to ask
something in regard of Nikon's GEM usage for archival stuff.
Of course, this is primarily for Nikon scanner users who use GEM routinely.
First of all, I found applying GEM at the maximum setting (4) to be most
efficient
Thanks Anthony, appreciate your help.
I have my monitor usually set to 1280x1024, but as I infer from your
explanations this cannot be considered as common practice, so the target is
under 800x600.
However, in terms of colors my graphics card/monitor combo works with 32 bit
color definitions.
Now,
Alex writes:
> what would be preferred policy of image
> offering for the public ? I mean small GIFs
> as thumbnails linked to JPEGs of certain
> resolution of JPEG only approach ?
It depends on your intended audience and the type of connections and
machines you anticipate that they will have.
BTW, about Web exhibition:
what would be preferred policy of image offering for the public ?
I mean small GIFs as thumbnails linked to JPEGs of certain resolution of
JPEG only approach ?
I jus approached the step of building web gallery as part of my soon-to-be
web site, so would appreciate any h
Stan writes:
> What if the image is being prepared for a
> website?
The procedure is the same, but the final size for the image is of course
quite small compared to the original scan.
I do set the JPEG compression a lot higher for Web use than for print use,
as download time is important for We
Re sharpening:
What if the image is being prepared for a website? Of the three
steps--resampling to get the right size and 72 dpi, converting to JPEG
format and sharpening--what is the ideal order? Should sharpening still be
the very last step?
Stan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTE
17 matches
Mail list logo
