Unfortunately I'm not one of the lucky majority who have scanners that produce data with more than 10 bits per channel. I am still stuck with my LS30. I don't know about other scanners, but I can say that difference between scanning using Vuescan at 10 bits per channel instead of Nikonscan at 8 bits per channel makes a HUGE difference in the information I can get out of film. In particular, I find that subtle shadings of similar colour (eg. flower petals) become posterised with Nikonscan while Vuescan produces smoother results. Because Vuescan doesn't have the facilities to adjust things that Nikonscan does, I always need to do a significant amount of editing later. But Vuescan turns the LS30 into a worthwhile scanner, where with Nikonscan it's VERY ordinary indeed.
My point is that for some of us, getting the data into the PC at more than 8 bits per channel makes a lot of sense. I dispute the claim that if you have to do a significant amount of adjustment after scanning that you haven't done it right. It depends on the circumstances. Getting the *right* 24 bits can sometimes better be done with an image editing program than the scanner's interface. Rob (yes, I know I'm late to be wading into the discussion) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
