Digital BW, The Print

Chris, I believe this comes from the pre-press world, and in addition is
several years out-of-date- when scanning at lower resolution, with file size
limited by available ram.

My experience with 7kx9k images output as LVT 4x5 negs shows little or no
need of sharpening if the scan is of a sharp glossy print or neg.

I'm happy to be corrected, however [g]...

Bill

on 12/5/01 12:30 PM, tzinzunzan2000 wrote:

35mm negs with SS4000 at 4000. My statement about the softness of
scans is not based so much on my own experience, however, as what
I've read in books, the Web, etc.

Chris

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Bill Morse <willym@b...>
wrote:
> Hi Chris-
> 
> What are you scanning with? At what resolution?
> 
> Bill
> 
> on 12/5/01 12:13 PM, tzinzunzan2000 wrote:
> 
> According to my understanding, scanned images are by their nature
> somewhat soft and that some degree of sharpening is usually required
> and is done as a matter of course. Are you saying that at no point
in
> your process do you sharpen the image? Also, I acknowledge that
> certain images, are just fine as soft.
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Bill Morse <willym@b...>
> wrote:
> > Austin, I don't normally sharpen either, I just scan at the
highest
> > resolution I can get, then wait while the file opens in PS [g].
> Sharpening
> > can, however, be an expressive tool- e.g.. Martin's image in the
> photo
> > exchange, where the background is left soft and somewhat grainy,
> while the
> > stone chimney is sharp, sharp, sharp.  Somehow the combination
puts
> you (or
> > at least me) into the scene.
> > 
> > Otherwise sharpening is just trying to get lo-res to look like an
> 8x10
> > contact print- why bother!
> > 
> > Bill



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]