16-bit per channel scanning
I have a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400, which seems to do a good job as far as I am concerned scanning negatives and slides.
However I am not convinced that I am using it to its full potential. It has the capability to scan at 16-bit colour depth per RGB channel, which I believe means that each colour channel has 65,536 possible values, rather than 256 with 8-bit. (Or to put it a different way, each value of an 8-bit per channel scan is subdivided into 256 different values.) 8-bit per channel is the same as 24-bit colour depth (ie 8 bits per channel x 3 channels).
The scanner comes bundled with Photoshop Elements 2, which irritatingly cannot cope with 16-bit per channel colour, so I have tended to scan at 8-bit (not a particularly conscious decision originally as 8-bit is the default). This generally results in fine results, particularly as I do nothing but look at the results on my monitor at the moment.
However, when trying to redeem some underexposed photo, or retrieve some skulker from the depths of the shadows of a photo, by adjusting the levels. It seems to me that in these cases it would be much better to scan at 16-bit, then adjust the levels, then save as 8-bit, if that is the desired result. This should result in much more colour detail in the finished result (subject to the limitations of the original film).
Is this the correct analysis?
I can use the scanner software to do level adjustments to the prescan, and then scan at 16-bit and reduce to 8-bit, which I think should get to the same result, although I am not entirely convinced. Also I like to scan in batches, which is not ideal for this sort of individual attention.
Alternatively I can use a different image processing program. I am not particularly keen on paying for the full Photoshop, but what about Paintshop Pro, which I have used before and liked - will this take 16-bit images? Or any other suggestions.
Also, once I get into printing my images, I assume there will be some benefit in having 16-bit images, is this right?
Thanks for staying to the end of this, and any comments gratefully received!
Andrew
I have a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400, which seems to do a good job as far as I am concerned scanning negatives and slides.
However I am not convinced that I am using it to its full potential. It has the capability to scan at 16-bit colour depth per RGB channel, which I believe means that each colour channel has 65,536 possible values, rather than 256 with 8-bit. (Or to put it a different way, each value of an 8-bit per channel scan is subdivided into 256 different values.) 8-bit per channel is the same as 24-bit colour depth (ie 8 bits per channel x 3 channels).
The scanner comes bundled with Photoshop Elements 2, which irritatingly cannot cope with 16-bit per channel colour, so I have tended to scan at 8-bit (not a particularly conscious decision originally as 8-bit is the default). This generally results in fine results, particularly as I do nothing but look at the results on my monitor at the moment.
However, when trying to redeem some underexposed photo, or retrieve some skulker from the depths of the shadows of a photo, by adjusting the levels. It seems to me that in these cases it would be much better to scan at 16-bit, then adjust the levels, then save as 8-bit, if that is the desired result. This should result in much more colour detail in the finished result (subject to the limitations of the original film).
Is this the correct analysis?
I can use the scanner software to do level adjustments to the prescan, and then scan at 16-bit and reduce to 8-bit, which I think should get to the same result, although I am not entirely convinced. Also I like to scan in batches, which is not ideal for this sort of individual attention.
Alternatively I can use a different image processing program. I am not particularly keen on paying for the full Photoshop, but what about Paintshop Pro, which I have used before and liked - will this take 16-bit images? Or any other suggestions.
Also, once I get into printing my images, I assume there will be some benefit in having 16-bit images, is this right?
Thanks for staying to the end of this, and any comments gratefully received!
Andrew
Last edited: