So I guess I'll use Austin's
method, since there is less processing involved and you get to actual
printing faster.
I applaud that you actually tried both and reached your own conclusions. Worth more
than any amount of argument and theory :)
Do you actually get the print finished quicker
00 7:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors/printing exact dimensions
with Photosho
So I guess I'll use Austin's
method, since there is less processing involved and you get to actual
printing faster.
I applaud that you actually tried both and reache
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Tony Sleep wrote:
Look, I was trying to simplify a common source of confusion for newbies,
which is that scans have only one dimensional parameter that matters:
the number
of pixels along each side. I know this because I have explained
it to many, many of them, and
This does seem to be a confusing issue to some. I've had seasoned professional
photographers
bring me JPG image files on a 3.5" floppy asking for an 8" X 10" print. The only
correlation
between the pixel density product (H X V) of the electronic image and the hard image
is the
target
available.
Tim Mimpriss
Cymru/Wales
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Paris" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 3:10 PM
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
This is so true! About getting confused, I mean. When I first s
The only dimensions that matter are the number of pixels. The dpi and
hence the "physical dimensions" are utterly meaningless.
That's erroneous to say they are 'utterly meaningless'. They CLEARLY are
utterly meaningFUL to the printer driver, and, along with the xy number of
pixels,
inch and by halving the image size you have
effectively
doubled the dpi.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Frank Paris
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 9:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
The only dimensions that matter are the number of pixels. The dpi and
hence the "physical dimensions" are utterly meaningless.
That's erroneous to say they are 'utterly meaningless'. They CLEARLY are
utterly meaningFUL to the printer driver, and, along with the xy number of
pixels,
rke
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 10:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
But you're not doing anything of the kind.
The only dimensions that matter are the number of pixels. The dpi and
hence the "physical dimensions" are utterly meaningl
: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
That so-called resizing is nothing of the kind!
All it does is change the dpi figure in the file, the picture content is
completely unchanged.
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Laurie Solomon) wrote:
Resizing in Photoshop is not interpolation
Austin Franklin wrote:
The only dimensions that matter are the number of pixels. The dpi and
hence the "physical dimensions" are utterly meaningless.
That's erroneous to say they are 'utterly meaningless'. They CLEARLY are
utterly meaningFUL to the printer driver, and, along with the
Tony Sleep wrote:
Just to prevent reinventing the wheel, is this based upon personal
experience? My assumption would be different (since Photoshop does a
wonderful resampling job, and many printer spoolers do not
I've tried printing same image at 240,300,360 and 720dpi. I reckoned
Austin Franklin wrote:
This is absolutely correct. You can send the printer driver any
resolution
you want, and it has to interpolate the data into halftone screens
anyway.
If you do leave the box checked, and resize, you will then be double
interpolating the data...once in PS
Nope, I clearly remember you starting this thread.
Lawrence Welk
This is severely off-topic, and has no place on a list concerned almost
entirely with Epson printers
8=p
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner
info comparisons
Guy Prince wrote:
Art,
Point taken. But the bright orange blazers and pants with the
bright orange background kept me mesmerized. I was helpless.
Guy
I have to admit I haven't seen the show since we got a color TV...
(about 35 years ago??)
Come to think of it, is that the
Johnny Deadman wrote:
on 5/11/00 8:16 pm, Arthur Entlich at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when I want to be warm and comfy, I sit in the living room
(big enough for 5 people on two sofas) with my laptop and pretend
everything is rosey while watching Lawrence Welk. Tonight's show
Austin Franklin wrote:
This is absolutely correct. You can send the printer driver any resolution
you want, and it has to interpolate the data into halftone screens anyway.
If you do leave the box checked, and resize, you will then be double
interpolating the data...once in PS and once
atiel (12 years)
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 7:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
I'm still not getti
This is absolutely correct. You can send the printer driver any
resolution
you want, and it has to interpolate the data into halftone screens
anyway.
If you do leave the box checked, and resize, you will then be double
interpolating the data...once in PS and once in the printer
Art,
It was an original show with recent sketches with Bobby and his
adult son.
Cloning? Egads man, don't even ~think~ it.
Guy
I have to admit I haven't seen the show since we got a color X-Mozilla-Status: 0009
ago??)
Come to think of it, is that the original L. Welk, or
I've been confused by this for the last two years using the HP
PhotoSmart Scanner, and now my SS4000 software allows the same thing.
What I would like to see is a procedure to do the following (for
example): I
scan at 4000 DPI in a crop ratio 11:14. Then on A3 size paper I want to
print
What I would like to see is a procedure to do the following (for
example): I
scan at 4000 DPI in a crop ratio 11:14. Then on A3 size paper I want to
print an image exactly 11"X14".
I can tell you how I do it:-
I do it slightly differently, and I'd be curious if you'd compare the
What stumped me was when I scanned that same slide at 2650 dpi
and attempted to make a 5 x 7 size image suitable for
printing.
You may well be attempting to scan at 5x7" @ 2650ppi, ie (5*2650) x
(7*2650) = 13250x18550, which will cause lots of interpolation. 256Mb
would
Subject: filmscanners: Re: monitors
i am a photographer with a PC, Nikon scanner and Epson 750
(eventually a
2000). i want to get a 20 inch monitor and would like some
recommendations
about what kind to get? thanks, Joanna
get it. I
too haven't a lot of success with Adobe Gamma.
Chris.
- Original Message -
From: "Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 2:01 AM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: Monitors
I have the new Samsung SyncMaster 900NF (19 inch)
Frank,
I am using an older HP 1120C. I don't have that feature in my
printer driver. I know I need a new printer, but the film
scanner was more important. Most of my work goes directly to
the printer on a ZIP disk, the printer isn't critical. Yet.
Guy
I'm a
Gordon,
That is exactly what I did, I just didn't mention that I had
scanned it, then manipulated it in Picture Publisher.
I can't remember where I read it, maybe scantips.com, but would
the fact that I have several copies loaded into memory for the
UNDO
Art,
Point taken. But the bright orange blazers and pants with the
bright orange background kept me mesmerized. I was helpless.
Guy
Anyone who watches (and worse still, listens to) Lawrence Welk should be
forced to sit in the garage and freeze his *(*@ off, IMHO. ;-)
And I don't
]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
What stumped me was when I scanned that same slide at 2650 dpi
and attempted to make a 5 x 7 size image suitable for
printing.
You may well be attempting to scan at 5x7" @ 2650ppi, ie (5*2650) x
(7*2650) = 13250x18550, which will cause
If I see another post on Epson color shifts, I'll scream :-)
Point taken. But the bright orange blazers and pants with the
bright orange background kept me mesmerized. I was helpless.
Guy
Anyone who watches (and worse still, listens
ears)
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Laurie Solomon
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 9:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Resizing in Photoshop is not int
on 5/11/00 8:16 pm, Arthur Entlich at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when I want to be warm and comfy, I sit in the living room
(big enough for 5 people on two sofas) with my laptop and pretend
everything is rosey while watching Lawrence Welk. Tonight's show
showcases Walt Disney.
I watched
Hello Johnny,
AHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAH, you SAW IT
Wasn't that the best show ever?
Yes, the woman who sung "when I wish upon a star" was a true gift.
If anyone out there taped that episode, I would pay ... for the
tape.
My wife and I sat glued to the during the
This does not
involve any sampling of the bits across the scan to create a smaller
image
(that is interpolation).
That's actually called 'decimation', when you 'remove' data...interpolation
is when you 'add' dataother than that 'point of order', what you said
was right on.
nt: Monday, November 06, 2000 5:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
What precisely do you mean by "resizing"?
By "resizing" I mean precisely "rescaling," or changing the dimensions of
the image without making any change in the r
I was of the opinion that interpolation was
the general term which covered both down sampling and upsampling; but I
guess I was wrong in this assumption. Until your post, I was totally
unaware of the term "decimation" with respect to sampling; I associated
it
with destructive natural and
I'm still not getting this thread. Why is resizing in PhotoShop not
interpolating? It still has to use bilinear resampling, doesn't it,
which is
a form of interpolation.
Resizing is crude, better to resample using bicubic interpolation, tho
PS calls that resizing too. So it *is*
to kill enough to make the point, but leave enough
to become useful and willing members of society (i.e., taxpayers).
--Dana
--
From: Laurie Solomon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[7]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Date: Monday, November 06, 2000 8:29 PM
I can accept
I have been forced into laptopdom because of space.
Commiserations. Like I say, I use a laptop out of choice for non-imaging
stuff, and occasionally I've used it on location for scanning. Press
photographers have been doing this for years. But reviewing the images on
a proper system is
This last week I bought the Nikon LS-30 and found that I needed
some new skills to run the darn thing.
This is true of all filmscanners, and should be written in large letters
on the box. It would save a lot of disappointment and negative comments
about products. Unfortunately the
Yes, they should. But since I have been using a flatbed
scanner for about six years now, I figured I had the skill set
to fumble through it. I did.
I was able to get a gorgeous scan about five tries in, even
found that fancy new technology of Nikon's.
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Guy: I also am new at this, have an LS-30, and a system with
much less capacity
than yours. I have found (through trial and error) that the
system handles the
scan better if you scan at 2700 set at the original negative
size, then play
Guy Prince wrote:
Tony,
I have been forced into laptopdom because of space. We had to
buy a home about 1/4 the size of the rental home we had. My
computer/photography lab was sacrificed.
Although I do have a large two car detached garage with power,
water,
Hello Tony,
TONY HUGS !!! People think I am nuts, in my circle of
friends for not doing image editing on my laptop.
Thank you so much for putting it into print.
I am new to the list and my just like it here. Thanks again,
Guy
Friday, November 03, 2000, 11:46:00 PM, you
think.
Guy
Friday, November 03, 2000, 7:15:33 PM, you wrote:
E Sony G-500
E Sincerely.
E Ezio
E www.lucenti.com e-photography site
E - Original Message -
E From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 1:53 AM
E Subject: filmscanners: Re
com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Guy Prince
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 9:21 AM
To: Ezio
Subject: Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Wow, some very informative information here.
I have
Frank Paris wrote:
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design
and as far as I know will always be there. I know, it is a nuisance. I'm
always mistaking them for a scratch on the film, for that's just about what
Those lines are shadows of wires used to tension
Saturday, November 04, 2000, 10:51:34 AM, you wrote:
FP The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design
FP and as far as I know will always be there.
Rats.
FP Some Viewsonic monitors are very expensive, some aren't. Depends on what you
FP want and the
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design
and as far as I know will always be there.
Tubes that use an aperture grid, such as some of Mitsubishi's, are a better
compromise between the severe tonal aperture errors with shadow-mask tubes, and
the striped
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design
and as far as I know will always be there.
Yes, they hold the aperture grill on...
TONY HUGS !!! People think I am nuts, in my circle of
friends for not doing image editing on my laptop.
Thank you so much for putting it into print.
I am new to the list and my just like it here. Thanks again,
I have the laptop I use for email and accounts and stuff right
p I watched a rep from a big name company trying to demo one of their filmscanners
p on a laptop recently.
Sigh. Misguided foos.
I went to a dealer day at a local camera shop and got to touch a
Nikon D1. But it was awesome, not fuzzy at all.
Well then, I am taking mine off. They make everything all
fuzzy.
Saturday, November 04, 2000, 2:50:02 PM, you wrote:
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design
and as far as I know will always be there.
AF Yes, they hold the aperture grill
Tony,
I have been forced into laptopdom because of space. We had to
buy a home about 1/4 the size of the rental home we had. My
computer/photography lab was sacrificed.
Although I do have a large two car detached garage with power,
water, sewer, gas and ethernet in
i am a photographer with a PC, Nikon scanner and Epson 750 (eventually a
2000). i want to get a 20 inch monitor and would like some recommendations
about what kind to get? thanks, Joanna
on 11/3/00 5:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i am a photographer with a PC, Nikon scanner and Epson 750 (eventually a
2000). i want to get a 20 inch monitor and would like some recommendations
about what kind to get? thanks, Joanna
This does not answer your question,
I have the new Samsung SyncMaster 900NF (19 inch) monitor for about a month.
For the price (approx. $425.00 plus $50.00 for shipping), it has been a
wonderful investment. There was a review in PEI magazine (Andrew Rodney; the
August issue) that sealed the deal. This monitor is significantly
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert DeCandido
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 6:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: filmscanners: Re: Monitors
BTW, why the Epson 2000? Too much money, too slow and Cone will
have a color
CIS
58 matches
Mail list logo
