Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3  Previous Next
|
|
Image size? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
Quoting VirusPil:
Quote:
And at last a cover scan is always a kind of personnel preferance.
This very much seems to be the case, but it shouldn't be so. Our cover scans should look like accurate representations of the covers, but many of the online covers have excessive contrast and sharpness boosting (and of course, other obvious imperfections.) I find it a bit amusing that many people seem to be more concerned with whether or not they can clearly read the fine print on a back cover scan than they are with whether it actually looks like the real cover.
--------------- That too is subjective. This is why I have always used the Pantone system to try and balance colors, at least to a standard. My system reads the colors from as many points on a given cover as I deem necessary and provides information to balance the scan to the actual cover. While there is no standard for contrast per se, if you balance your colors you will generally balance your contrast as well. You have to remember Scott that no two pair of eyes perceive images exactly the same in any respect, making assessment subjective to some degree, Pantone brings a level of obejctivity to a very subjective issue. Ialso use the Pantone system to continuously balance my system. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,850 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
You have to remember Scott that no two pair of eyes perceive images exactly the same in any respect, making assessment subjective to some degree. Nor do any two scanners or any two monitors, but I don't think either one of us disagrees that excessive image manipulation has been applied to many a cover scan. --------------- |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Here's another link: The Myth of DPII also prefer to scan in at a high DPI and then clean up/tweak the scan before I resize it down to 500x700 max. Some scans actually resize down quite poorly when scanned at a high DPI due to the print pixelation - the cover is actually a bunch of colored overlapping circles. I try to average out/reduce these artifacts before I resize the image down and tend to get dramatically better quality doing so. I don't keep my scans at higher than 500x700 because I've yet to actually need a scan larger than that. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Here's another link: The Myth of DPI
I also prefer to scan in at a high DPI and then clean up/tweak the scan before I resize it down to 500x700 max. Some scans actually resize down quite poorly when scanned at a high DPI due to the print pixelation - the cover is actually a bunch of colored overlapping circles. I try to average out/reduce these artifacts before I resize the image down and tend to get dramatically better quality doing so.
I don't keep my scans at higher than 500x700 because I've yet to actually need a scan larger than that. That depends on how you do it, Doc, lol. There is a secret. The one thing I still haven't found an acceptable answer to is those accursed reflective covers and lenticulars.<grumble> Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Scanning an image at 3600 DPI is not the same as converting an existing image to a different DPI.
When you scan at 3600 DPI, you're getting 3,600 pixels per inch. When you scan at 300 DPI, you're getting 300 pixels per inch. You have failed to understand the difference between optical resolution and interpolated resolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_zoom | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Forum Moderator: Removed | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." | | | | Last edited: by Forum Moderator |
| | Registered: July 31, 2008 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,506 |
| | Posted: | | | | Having just opened up both images, I can say that they are 100% identical. There is not a single visible difference between them. |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote:
Quoting Dr. Killpatient:
Quote:
Scanning an image at 3600 DPI is not the same as converting an existing image to a different DPI.
When you scan at 3600 DPI, you're getting 3,600 pixels per inch. When you scan at 300 DPI, you're getting 300 pixels per inch.
You have failed to understand the difference between optical resolution and interpolated resolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_zoom Not really, because it has nothing to do with interpolated resolution. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 Previous Next
|
|
|