Photoscientia wrote: >And doesn't explain why all the scanner manufacturers are now moving to >14 bits. I don't think anyone commented on my suggestion that a 14 bit A/D still gives more detail in the middle part of the range of values (where colour neg film generally is) precisely because the noise is lowest there? It should avoid most noise generated by the A/D and noise from the CCD? In the middle of the intensity range, the signal to noise ratio should be the best? Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Rob Geraghty
- SV: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Ingemar Lindahl
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Viacheslav Zilberfayn
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Frank Paris
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? photoscientia
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Rob Geraghty
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Rob Geraghty
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the b... Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's ... Rob Geraghty
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So i... Austin Franklin
