Paul Floyd wrote:
> Quoting Bob Washburne <email@example.com>:
> What are you going to be doing with these images? Visualizing them
> won't be easy (they're certainly well beyond the scope of most
> monitors and printers). Unless you're doing research or doing high
> quality commercial printing, then 1200bpi/36bpp is overkill.
You are correct. 1200bpi/36bpp is overkill for most visual
My application is archival. I have a collection of old (about a
century) documents and photos. They will not be around much longer.
While it may be impractical to preserve the original document (these are
family records, not national treasures) it should be possible to scan
them and preserve their information. Once digitised, they can be copied
ad infinitum with no loss in quality. CD-R's are now cheap and DVD-R's
will soon follow.
The images are of borderline quality. Text is sometimes difficult to
read. Photos are blurred or smeared. Everything has taken on the
patina of age. There are some effective software packages out there for
image enhancement. They can remove red-eye, interpret text and
generally clean things up. Thirty, fifty years from now I'll bet that
they will perform magic - removing coffee stains, filling in destroyed
areas, sharpening a blurred photo.
But any software enhansement package must deal with the raw data and the
originals will no longer be around to rescan. So it is imperative that
I extract as much data as possible now while I still can. Ideally, I
would like to scan photos down to the emulsion resolution which would
represent all the information possible. For 19th century photography I
believe 1200 dpi comes very close to this.
So I wish to scan at resolutions greater then I can see so that future
software will have the additional information needed to make
enhansements which I CAN see.
And that is part of my fustration. I can't *see* if my scanner is doing
its job. I must trust that I am getting additional information and not,
as you correctly indicated, just four more bits of noise. This was one
of the draws of the HP 5370C. It claimed to be using 42 bpp internally
and outputting a clean 36 bpp. But the software which comes with the
scanner is only interested in visual effects.
Which all leads back to my original question: does anybody have
experiance with a scanner which shows that it *really* does provide
-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 08 2000 - 11:01:07 PST