nikonians

Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

| |
Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby MASTER YOUR TOOLS - Hardware & Software Digital postprocessing & workflow (Public) topic #35
View in linear mode

Subject: "42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing" Previous topic | Next topic
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberSat 11-Nov-00 03:06 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"


Private, UM
          

Ok, as I said before I'm new to this scanning of slides/negatives/photos, and the two software packages that came with the scanner are PhotoDeluxe 4.0 and Photoshop 5.0 LE. Neither of these packages allow editing of a photo scanned in at 42-bit (when I mean editing, I mean the used of filters, changing image size, changing hue, saturation, etc.). The software packages require the bit-depth to be reduced to 24 bit before editing can be performed.

Does a full-blown (extremely overpriced, in my opinion) copy of Photoshop allow editing of these photos while still at 42-bit?
Are there any other programs out there that are just as good for scanning photos in, but a little less expensive, and still allow the editing of a 42 bit photo.


Now, those who know me understand that I'm not a cheap person; however, since I will only be using this software for scanning in my photos (and some friends' photos from time-to-time), I feel it is rather ludicrous to purchase a software program that will be used about once every two months that costs in the area of $500.00.

Also, if Photoshop is the best way to go (or the only way to go), has anyone had any luck purchasing this package on eBay?

Just to let you know, I'm currently scanning in my slides at 42-bit and saving them as a .tif file, and yes, they are large files. Later, when I plan on posting them to my website I will drop them down to a reasonable size .jpg file. However, scanning in as a .tif file allows me to keep a file that will not lose detail, as a .jpg file.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
vfnewman Gold Member Awarded for his multiple contributions to Resources Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014
11th Nov 2000
1
Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
11th Nov 2000
2
     Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
jrp Administrator JRP is one of the co-founders, has in-depth knowledge in various areas. Awarded for his contributions for the Resources
11th Nov 2000
3
     Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
AlanC
11th Nov 2000
4
Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
BJNicholls Gold Member Awarded for his contributions to the community and the Resources
11th Nov 2000
5
Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
12th Nov 2000
6
     Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
jrp Administrator JRP is one of the co-founders, has in-depth knowledge in various areas. Awarded for his contributions for the Resources
12th Nov 2000
7
     Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
12th Nov 2000
8
          Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
12th Nov 2000
9
     Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
AlanC
12th Nov 2000
10
          Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
12th Nov 2000
11
               Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
BJNicholls Gold Member Awarded for his contributions to the community and the Resources
14th Nov 2000
12
                    Reply message RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
15th Nov 2000
13
                         Reply message (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering an...
JMChen
21st Nov 2000
14
                              Reply message RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filterin...
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
21st Nov 2000
15
                                   Reply message RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filterin...
JMChen
21st Nov 2000
16
                                        Reply message RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filterin...
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
21st Nov 2000
17
                                             Reply message RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filterin...
JMChen
22nd Nov 2000
18
                                                  Reply message RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filterin...
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources
23rd Nov 2000
19

vfnewman Gold Member Awarded for his multiple contributions to Resources Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Charter MemberSat 11-Nov-00 04:26 PM
4323 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 0


Forest, US
          

Doug,

Even the full-blown (and fully-priced :-o ) version of Photoshop can only do "levels" adjustments (and maybe just a couple other things) on hi-bit images. The real usefulness of hi-bit images is, in fact, in doing the levels adjustments.

I strongly recommend you read up on this at

<http://www.scantips.com>

There is a section on the significance and importance of bit depth at:

<http://www.scantips.com/basics14.html>

The whole site in general is, IMHO, very good. I have learned a great deal there.

Also, did you know you can download a trial version of Photoshot 5.5? It does not have a time limit on it, but it cannot save or export images. It's a 55 Mb download (so I got mine at work and brought it home on a Zip disk), but it's the real deal.

Hope this helps.

Victor Newman

My Nikonians Gallery

www.nikonians.org - Worldwide Home for Nikon Photographers

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberSat 11-Nov-00 05:36 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 1


Private, UM
          

And years ago, I thought the law was perplexing and very metaphorical compared to math. I believe I understand what is being said in the website. I also will admit that my scanning of slides is for printing smaller 4 x 6 prints and for converting to .jpg files for inclusion into my website that I’m in the process of remaking, so is this 42-bit really necessary? Probably not.

Thanks for the information, I had referred to this website before but forgot the link, I have now saved it as an “AOL Favorite Place,” so I will have immediate access to it whenever I require it, which might be by the hour.

I did go into Adobe’s website to try and find some information about their full-blown PhotoShop software, didn’t really find much information there, but did see their price was $609.00. (When surfing the web I did find a place called “Softbuys.com) that had the software for around $400.00.) I may eventually download the "trial offer on 5.5," and like you had to do, download at the office (through the T3 or T1 line), and download to a CD ROM.

Believe for now, I’ll go ahead and stay with what I have. I’ll continue to scan into Photoshop LE, and then because it is a lot easier to understand for the beginner, I’ll edit the files in Photo Deluxe 4.0.
Thanks for the information. Have a great day, I'm going to give blood, so no more scanning for a couple hours.

Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
jrp Administrator JRP is one of the co-founders, has in-depth knowledge in various areas. Awarded for his contributions for the Resources Charter MemberSat 11-Nov-00 06:07 PM
35265 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 2


San Pedro Garza García, MX
          

DD:
You might want to give a try to JascSoftware Paint Shop Pro 6.0 which was selling for less than US$100 last time I bought one. It can do almost (if not all of) the same as the Photoshop 5.5 and accepts all of the plug-ins.
Have a great time
JRP
My profile
Previous photography stuff, before Nikonians:
A Brief Love Story

Have a great time
JRP (Founder & Administrator. Nikonian at the north-eastern Mexican desert) Gallery, Brief Love Story, The Team
Join the Silver, Gold and Platinum members that help this happen; upgrade. Join your personal web site to the Nikonians WebRing
Make sure you check our workshops at The Nikonians Academy and the product catalog of the Photo Pro Shop

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
AlanC Basic MemberSat 11-Nov-00 06:31 PM
2700 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 2


UK
          

Doug,

You can upgrade from LE to the full product, although it may not save you anything over buying the full product at a really good discount - it's far more expensive than the upgrades to new versions.

Alan.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

BJNicholls Gold Member Awarded for his contributions to the community and the Resources Charter MemberSat 11-Nov-00 07:36 PM
10095 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 0


Salt Lake City, US
          

LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-00 AT 03:00 AM (GMT)

Hi Doug,

Think of Photoshop LE and similar stuff as the N60 of image editing software. Photoshop is the F5. It's indispensible for professionals, but it's not as easy to use or master as the consumer level software.

I just upgraded to Photoshop 6. While there's nothing earthshaking or revolutionary in the upgrade, the $250 is money well spent for the refinement, particularly in color management for me.

Until you're using layers and other advanced features, you probably don't need to spend additional money on an upgrade. 42 bits is only good for embedding non visible image data (like saving an infrared dust and scratch reduction channel) with your images. There's no good reason to keep your image file in 42 bits for editing and color correction. I don't even get drum scans done in 42 bit depth. Remember that a tiff saved with LZW compression is half the file size with no loss, but it takes longer to open.

BJ

BJ

Zenfolio gallery

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberSun 12-Nov-00 03:07 AM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 5


Private, UM
          

Ok, here is one of the photos I scanned in today. It's a 96 dpi jpg file with only the "quick fix" on photo deluxe used, not other touch ups peformed.
Now, the thing that now confuses me is this.
Viewing the photo in PhotoShop or Photo Deluxe or on any other viewer on my system, it appears very sharp, with good colors. However, what I uploaded into GeoCities, and display on this page appears mottled, especially the hills in the background, and the colors do not appear as crisp as when viewed in Photo Deluxe. Also, the dark area in the rock does not show any detail, yet the photo in Photo Deluxe does show good detail. In fact, when viewing the same file side-by-side through two separate windows, one with the file in GeoCities, the other window with the photo in Photo Deluxe, there is a heck of a noticeable difference between the photos.

Is there a change made when the file is uploaded from my computer into an Internet site such as GeoCities.

I can't imagine it would be the CRT since it displays the photo different. (CRT set for 1280 x 1024 24-bit color.)

Any suggestions or information as to what is happening, or what I need to do to display a better photo on the WWW?

http://www.geocities.com/f5fstop/Images/roll3-7.jpg


Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
jrp Administrator JRP is one of the co-founders, has in-depth knowledge in various areas. Awarded for his contributions for the Resources Charter MemberSun 12-Nov-00 06:17 AM
35265 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 6


San Pedro Garza García, MX
          

LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-00 AT 07:18 AM (GMT)

No, there is no chance when it is uploaded, but a change is certainly made when you save the file, because a certain degree of compression is made.
Check your settings.
Also maybe you are automatically using the unsharp mask on.
BTW, I like the above picture very much and consider it to have very acceptable quality.
Have a great time
JRP
My profile
Previous photography stuff, before Nikonians:
A Brief Love Story

Have a great time
JRP (Founder & Administrator. Nikonian at the north-eastern Mexican desert) Gallery, Brief Love Story, The Team
Join the Silver, Gold and Platinum members that help this happen; upgrade. Join your personal web site to the Nikonians WebRing
Make sure you check our workshops at The Nikonians Academy and the product catalog of the Photo Pro Shop

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberSun 12-Nov-00 03:26 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 7


Private, UM
          

Thanks for the compliment, but there is no differences in the files. As I said, I opened up both the exact same files side-by-side on my computer, and even this morning, the one in PhotoDeluxe appears to be sharper and has no mottled appearance.
I even moved the open windows from one side of the CRT to the other to make sure there was not a problem with the CRT. I even had someone else take a look at this Phenomenon, and she totally agrees that there is a difference.
I fail to understand why, there is a difference. Oh well, that's life.

Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberSun 12-Nov-00 05:47 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 8


Private, UM
          

Here are two more examples of photos scanned in last night. First one still appears to have a mottled appearance in the area off in the distance, where the mountains meet the sky.

http://www.geocities.com/f5fstop/Images/roll5-33a.jpg
Taken at high point at Dolly Sods Reserve in West Virginia. Fuji Velvia, Nikon F5 mounted to monopod, with Tokina 28-80 F/2.8 AT-X Pro, with polarizer.

http://www.geocities.com/f5fstop/Images/roll4-29a.jpg
Taken at Blackwater Falls State Park, West Virginia. Hand-held Nikon F100 with Kodak EPL 400X slide film. The yearling...known as Bambi... actually walked up to me looking for something to eat. I had mounted my Nikkor 80-200 F/2.8, thinking I would have to get the shot from a distance, I had to keep backing up to get Bambi in the frame. Darn thing kept coming closer. I probably could have brought Bambi home as a pet. Lucky, there is NO hunting in the park. Hope Bambi didn't wonder outside the park a day later, hunting season opened the next day.


Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
AlanC Basic MemberSun 12-Nov-00 09:06 PM
2700 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 6


UK
          

Doug,

Some photo hosting sites (Photopoint, for example) will recompress images you send them if they're above a certain size - but this doesn't happen with normal web hosting services.

You could try saving the image you see in your browser and comparing the file to the one you uploaded: if they're not identical in size then something's messing up your files.

I'm not sure of this but I seem to remember hearing that AOL could mess up image files - are you using their browser?

Your photos look fine to me. There are some compression artefacts around the top of the tree in the Dolly Sods Reserve photo, but it's nothing too terrible.

Alan.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberSun 12-Nov-00 11:26 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 10


Private, UM
          

LAST EDITED ON Nov-13-00 AT 00:27 AM (GMT)



>You could try saving the image
>you see in your browser
>and comparing the file to
>the one you uploaded: if
>they're not identical in size
>then something's messing up your
>files.>

Good idea, I'll check the file sizes.

>I'm not sure of this but
>I seem to remember hearing
>that AOL could mess up
>image files - are you
>using their browser?
>
That could be the problem. Now that I think of it, I heard that before, and yes, I do use AOL. Problem is, I can't even check at work since I have a laptop with the Active Matrix display and I know that messes up the visual image. I may have to do some wondering around the office and find someone on the Internet with a normal monitor and have them pull up Nikonians website and check the photos. Thanks for the info,



Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
BJNicholls Gold Member Awarded for his contributions to the community and the Resources Charter MemberTue 14-Nov-00 04:00 AM
10095 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 11


Salt Lake City, US
          

LAST EDITED ON Nov-14-00 AT 05:12 AM (GMT)

The mottling in the sky is probably JPEG "blocking"... it's most noticeable in areas of smooth solid color. The higher your JPEG compression, the worse the blocking effect gets. Actually, these images look quite good for web use. The difference you see between your file gamma and color while editing vs. browing is due to a difference in calibration between the programs. I don't know Photoshop LE, but if you set your preview mode to Uncompensated Windows (assuming you're not Mac-based) will show your image as you'll see it in your browser.

Also keep in mind that your image will display from the web at 72ppi no matter what your file's internal pixel-pitch is set at. If you set your image to 72ppi without resampling, you'll be viewing the image at its web size when you open it in your image editor. Another way to see the web size is to use the "View Actual Pixels" Photoshop view setting.

It's best to set your images based on a maximum pixel size for browsing. If you want an image to fit in a basic browser window, you should go for a maximum size of about 600w x 400 h. You can certainly link to larger images, but keep in mind the load times and amount of scrolling that folks with lower display resolutions will have to deal with.

You can scan at higher resolutions for other purposes and then resize your file and pixel pitch to 72ppi for web use in one resampling cycle.

Most scanned images look better with some amount of unsharp mask applied. Play with the sliders and see what looks best to you.

The full Photoshop program lets you preview the effects of JPEG compression on your images before you save them. I don't know if LE offers this feature, but it's very helpful to avoid too much compression or, conversely, too large a file. Try to do JPEG compression once for an image since artifacts tend to multiply if you resave your compressed file.

BJ

Zenfolio gallery

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberWed 15-Nov-00 01:09 AM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#13. "RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 12


Private, UM
          

I used a moderate compression of approx 80 percent. So, it should not be as compressed.
As for the 72 dpi, well there is something that does confuse me. I read the information someone sent me regarding scanning (link is located above) and in that pile of information there was information regarding scanning for screen resolution. I have to admit it made sense; however, it does state that it all depends on your screen. Is the internet different? Does the internet automatically scale everything down to 72 dpi?
I know when I use the auto setup in my scanner software and set it up for Monitor/Web it automatically goes to 96 dpi. So, am I getting confused? A little.

Now, the good news. I downloaded AOL 6.0 today, and the photos appear a lot better. Still not as good off the internet, but they are definately not as mottled as they were the last time I viewed them. (Should say "viewed it" since the deer picture was always ok.)

Anyway, thanks for the information. I'll check some of the settings in Photoshop LE and see what I can find out.

Have a great day,

Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
JMChen Basic MemberTue 21-Nov-00 05:02 PM
16 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "(AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 13


Chicago,
          

hi doug,

i use AOL as well and i know your problem if you haven't "fixed" it already. it has to to with your graphics view setting.

i still use 5.0 but hopefully still the same in 6.0.

goto MY AOL \ PREFERENCES \ GRAPHICS

set the "JEPG compression quality" to 100.

you might have to REFRESH the page once you view the page since it might be getting the photos from your cache (which are the old compressed photos stored on your HDD).

AOL does their own compression so graphics can be downloaded faster. understandable for their own icons but not good for JPEGs.

hope this is the problem....!

.... john

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberTue 21-Nov-00 05:43 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 14


Private, UM
          

LAST EDITED ON Nov-21-00 AT 06:45 PM (GMT)

Thanks, I will check this out when I get back in town on my home computer. As for 6.0? I had to delete it from my system. There are so many bugs in the system with certain types of modems, and especially with Windows Milenium that it drove me crazy, so I switched back to 5.0. I'll wait a few months to try 6.0 again. I never did load 6.0 on my laptop that runs Windows 98; however, per AOL, there are not that many bugs with Windows 95 or 98, a few with 2000 and more than they can comprehend with ME.

Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
JMChen Basic MemberTue 21-Nov-00 05:54 PM
16 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 15


Chicago,
          

bugs are the reason i never upgrade whenever new versions come out; doesn't matter who the company is. i will eventually migrate to 6.0 in 1/2 yr after they get most of the bugs out.

and yes, i'm still using win98...!

drop a note either way if that setting was causing the problem.

... john

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberTue 21-Nov-00 11:54 PM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 16


Private, UM
          

Thanks for the info, it certainly made a difference in my laptop. All these years I was thinking that the internet did something to the file, and that along with active matrix screen on my laptop was the reason for mottled photos I was looking at. Well, sitting here in my hotel room in beautiful sunny and warm Buffalo, NY (yes, that was sarcasm, what else can I say considering there is more snow on the ground than I have ever seen in the last three years combined), I played around with the graphic preferences on AOL 5.0, and it made a remarkable change in the clarity of the photos. So, if it improved my laptop, I have no fear that it will not improve my 17 inch flat screen monitor at home.

Thanks again,

(Does it ever stop snowing in Buffalo? I better be able to fly outu of this "winter wonderland" tomorrow.)


Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                        
JMChen Basic MemberWed 22-Nov-00 04:37 AM
16 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#18. "RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 17


Chicago,
          

hi doug,

you're quite welcome. so glad to hear that the graphics setting solved the problem. just think, all those blurred years....

man, i heard about the snow in buffalo...! perhaps you can take some photos and post them (if you can get outside)....

i'm in chicago and i can't wait to get that kind of snow here this winter....!!

well, this could be the end of this thread.... see you in another thread.

... john

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                            
f5fstop Awarded for his contributions to the Resources Basic MemberThu 23-Nov-00 01:50 AM
2947 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: (AOL graphics view Fix!) RE: 42-Bit Image Filtering and Editing"
In response to Reply # 18


Private, UM
          

I guess I'm not that dedicated of a photographer this week. Last minute emergency trip to Buffalo to stem a possible legal problem, so I just packed and ran to the Nashville airport, and took two flights to get to that beautiful city along with water, known as Buffalo.
Now in MI, weather is about forty degrees too cold for me, not anywhere as much snow as Buffalo, and Friday I should be outta here, back to the warmer, but still too cold south.
Still amazed at the quality of the photos I now see on my laptop.
Can't wait to see what they will look like on my 17" monitor.

Hope you get your snow, but after I get back to TN. Although, I may take a trip up into the Smoky Mountains this winter to try and get some snow shots.

Doug


--Take only photographs, leave nothing but footprints--



"Take only photographs, leave only footprints"


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby MASTER YOUR TOOLS - Hardware & Software Digital postprocessing & workflow (Public) topic #35 Previous topic | Next topic