RE: CMYK vs RGB

["M. Denis Hill" <denis@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"If you can scan in CMYK thats even better."

"Hope I helped and didnt confuse"              [Denis: You did confuse.]

"What I was saying is that scanning in CMYK gives you a better
representation ..."

Ed,

I have extracted what you said, twice. It must be confusing to anyone less
knowledgeable than you about scanners. That's why I belabor the point.

Barring some recent development (please provide details if I'm wrong),
scanners all scan in RGB. Is this not to be expected of a transmissive color
process?

Any scanner that offers CMYK output is merely converting the RGB information
to CMYK before you get the file.

Denis

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sokolowski, Ed [mailto:esokolowski@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 6:21 AM
> To: 'panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: RE: LS-2000 help
>
>
> No I didnt say that What I was saying is that scanning in CMYK gives you a
> better representation of what your final output will be like in
> the scanner
> software. ALSO it stops the OOOPS I forgots and printing RGB. What I was
> getting at is Images being sent to CMYK Printers SHOULD be CMYK files....
> Thats all.....
>
> > ----------
> > From: 	M. Denis Hill
> > Reply To: 	panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: 	Tuesday, August 8, 2000 12:13 AM
> > To: 	panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: 	RE: LS-2000 help
> >
> > Ed,
> >
> > Do you mean that the on-the-fly RGB to CMYK conversion in
> scanner firmware
> > (or in the driver software) is better than Photoshop
> conversion? Or have I
> > missed something and there are scanners with CMYK PMTs?
> >
> > M. Denis Hill
> > Area 360 Communications
> > http://www.area360.com
> > 360.678.8351
> >
> > Have you visited the discussion forums at
> > http://www.colorfulcoupeville.com?
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sokolowski, Ed [mailto:esokolowski@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:04 PM
> > > To: 'panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> > > Subject: RE: LS-2000 help
> > >
> > >
> > > Harold,
> > >
> > > If you are trying to set the scanner up so that one setting can
> > > be used for
> > > all your scans you are making yourself crazy. It can not be done. Each
> > > negitive we scan,  just as each scene we photograph is
> unique. Trying to
> > > make the scanner "default" to some value that will give you perfect
> > scans
> > > just isnt happening. I think you found that out already.
> > >
> > > Do you have Photoshop? If not get it, If so get this book....
> > >
> > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0240515919/qid=965669645/sr
> > > =1-7/002-6
> > > 425206-4380854
> > >
> > > I am the Director of Graphic Production for a large cosmetics
> > > company in NYC
> > > and each one of my departments scan well over 1000 chromes a
> month on 10
> > > different types of scanners encluding the LS-2000  and I can tell you
> > from
> > > experience that 99% of all the work done to make these scans look good
> > is
> > > done in Photoshop. If you are serious about digital photography
> > > Photoshop is
> > > the ONLY tool to use.
> > >
> > > Ok just a few guidlines for better scans
> > >
> > > 1. Turn off sharpening
> > > 	Do that in photoshop during color correction and use SPARINGLY.
> > >
> > > 2. Figure out what the FINAL size of the scan and scan that size.
> > > (magnification %)
> > > 	For example If you have a 4X5 and you wanna make an 8X10 Scan it at
> > > 200% not at 1200 DPI.....
> > > 	DO NOT!!! I repeat DO NOT!!!  scan at the Max resolution of the
> > > scanner and then scale the photo up. That makes the WORST
> possible scan
> > +
> > > Its a waste of HD space. Your scans should rarely pass 250
> dpi. (If you
> > > wanna know why read the book)
> > >
> > > 3. Use Auto Levels. Unless you REALLY know what you are doing and
> > > know color
> > > 	correction and are willing to spend GOBS of time testing your
> > > particular scanner use Auto levels. This pretty much gaurentee's that
> > you
> > > will get a scan that has all the data you need in it for a good
> > > final scan.
> > >
> > > 4. If you are scanning for the WEB. PLEASE scan at 72dpi only.
> > > 300dpi scans
> > > are just BIG
> > > 	not better. Monitors can only reproduce 72dpi so PLEASE stay away
> > > from the 300dpi settings. + Use image ready in photoshop 5.5
> to further
> > > reduce the size of your scans.
> > >
> > > These things will get you in the ballpark and all you will
> have to do is
> > > tweek your scan in photoshop and you will have a BEAUTIFUL Image
> > > to print.
> > >
> > > One final thing.....
> > >
> > > If you are printing to an Epson Type Printer (CMYK not RGB)
> > > Change the mode
> > > of the pic to CMYK.
> > > All (well most all) scanners default to RGB to scan photos. If
> > > you can scan
> > > in CMYK thats even better.
> > >
> > > Hope I helped and didnt confuse
> > >
> > > Ed.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > ----------
> > > > From: 	Harold Wong
> > > > Reply To: 	panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Sent: 	Tuesday, August 1, 2000 11:32 AM
> > > > To: 	'panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> > > > Subject: 	LS-2000 help
> > > >
> > > > Can anybody offer me a few tips in using the Nikon LS-2000 for
> > > scanning in
> > > > 35mm shots for panoramic work on a Macintosh? Specifically,
> I'm having
> > > > difficult setting one exposure level and making it the
> default for the
> > > > rest of my photographs. Saving and recalling the "User Settings"
> > doesn't
> > > > seem to help as my other scans come out bad. I've also turned
> > > off the two
> > > > autoexposure features found in the Misc. preference panel. Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Harold
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >