Custom Search
|
|
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
Custom Search
|
In article <101836035802@wi.net>, david/lisa soderman <scapes@wi.net> writes >>>but it seems to fly in the face >>>of the 4800ppi's "extra sharpness" as being the culprit re: grain/noise. >>> >> Well, for the moment, I disagree with that conclusion David, and I will >> tell you why in due course, but I am interested to hear how you arrived >> at it. >> -- >> Kennedy > >Nothing profound. All I meant was to point out that none of the previous >noisy scans were done at interpolated 4800ppi...and that the lower rez scans >of 3.2k (supposedly opticel)/1.6k sport the same noise /grain. > Fair enough, but I think you need to know how the Minolta generates its 3200 and 1600ppi scans before you can come to that conclusion. Correct me if I am wrong here, but I don't think this scanner has an optical zoom arrangement and, if not, then these lower resolution scans are not optical resolutions, but downsampled derivatives of the full resolution of the scanner. Now, depending on how that downsampling is implemented, the noise could show a similar level or, if implemented correctly (as it is in the Nikon range but resulting in identical scan times for all resolutions) significantly reduce. For example, simplistically reducing from 4800ppi to 1600ppi should result in a noise reduction by a factor of three - since each new sample is taken from the average of 9 original pixels. (Noise reduces according to the square root of the number of samples.) That would closely simulate an optical resolution of 1600ppi, where the pixels size and pitch increase proportionally. This step also filters alias components by the larger pixel area before resampling, rather than simply increasing aliasing at the much lower Nyquist point. However, you can compare your lower resolution scans to Photoshop downsampled versions of the 4800ppi scan - and they are very similar. Knowing that the PS algorithm takes no steps to eliminate aliasing from the downsampling process, it is clear that the Minolta algorithm doesn't either. Hence my conclusion is that the extra sharpness of the Minolta is still a candidate for culprit - all the aliasing and other crud that is present at 4800ppi is just redistributed at 1600ppi. You won't find that with the Nikon (unless the CS8000 downsampling algorithm is substantially different from the CS4000 one) which Rafe can confirm for you. -- Kennedy Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed; A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed. Python Philosophers - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
 |