<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Redump Forum — Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
		<link>http://forum.redump.org/topic/4734/scanner-calibration-for-artwork-scanning/</link>
		<atom:link href="http://forum.redump.org/feed/rss/topic/4734/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:16:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>PunBB 1.4.4</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/24074/#p24074</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>huygens what software is the one in the first post? and can you post a more detailed guide?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (ghost)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:16:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/24074/#p24074</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/19376/#p19376</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Amazing stuff huygens <img src="http://forum.redump.org/img/smilies/big_smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="big_smile" /></p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (ssjkakaroto)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/19376/#p19376</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/19077/#p19077</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>That looks really really good.&nbsp; I can&#039;t wait to collect your scans. <img src="http://forum.redump.org/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /></p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (DJoneK)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:32:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/19077/#p19077</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/19076/#p19076</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>This looks great... consistency is good. Thanks again. I will be on the look out for IT8.7 reflective target after the move.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (pepsidrinker)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/19076/#p19076</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/19075/#p19075</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Images updated.</p><p>Method:<br />Scan at 600 dpi (no color correction)<br />Appy color profile<br />Apply Descreen 4.0 filter ($20 for the home version)<br />resize to 300 dpi using &quot;bicubic sharper&quot;<br />Fix damage with rubber stamp tool<br />save as png (large but better than tiff while still being lossless).</p><p>Note for archival purposes 300 dpi makes sense as the halftone screen frequency is 145lpi therefore 300dpi is just over twice the screen resolution. The res nees to be more that the halftone resolution because of the non-halftone parts of the image (playstation logos/ text).</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (huygens)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/19075/#p19075</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/18909/#p18909</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Ok, I will...I&#039;ll also ask my photographer friends if they have something like that. <img src="http://forum.redump.org/img/smilies/cool.png" width="15" height="15" alt="cool" /></p><p>Hopefully that program works with my old Compaq S200 lol.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (pepsidrinker)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:42:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/18909/#p18909</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/18908/#p18908</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I got mine off ebay for $15 I&#039;d look there first. I don&#039;t know about shipping but there&#039;s a German company that sells them for $10.00. <a href="http://www.targets.coloraid.de/">http://www.targets.coloraid.de/</a> Any IT8.7 reflective target will work. The Q-60 is the kodak number for their IT8.7 targets. </p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IT8">IT8.7 Wikipedia page</a></p><p>The corrected image looks much more like the original. It is indeed a blue sky not a purplish one.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (huygens)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:13:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/18908/#p18908</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/18906/#p18906</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>That should definitely be added to the guide with the corrected you can tell it&#039;s sky blue in the background and not that purplish blue. But how much did that cost you looking at the prices I&#039;ve seen between $40 to $100 for it. Though I went through the first 10 pages only.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (pepsidrinker)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/18906/#p18906</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]></title>
			<link>http://forum.redump.org/post/18903/#p18903</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Updated: I got access to a second scanner to compare the calibration to ensure consistancy accross scanners:</p><p>Raw Canon scanner output:<br /><span class="postimg"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3630/3680170586_5d1f9606af.jpg" alt="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3630/3680170586_5d1f9606af.jpg" /></span></p><p>Raw Epson scanner output:<br /><span class="postimg"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2457/3680171744_a56328f0cc.jpg" alt="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2457/3680171744_a56328f0cc.jpg" /></span></p><p>Corrected canon Image:<br /><span class="postimg"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2255/3680171030_4eeca12a53.jpg" alt="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2255/3680171030_4eeca12a53.jpg" /></span></p><p>Corrected Epson Image:<br /><span class="postimg"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3654/3679358055_2bd818f190.jpg" alt="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3654/3679358055_2bd818f190.jpg" /></span></p><br /><p>So other than the Epson being a much better scanner, calibration does ensure consistancy :-)</p><p>Still working on it but heres a cover using my current scan settings:<br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/29612438@N06/3679459919/sizes/l/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/29612438@N … 9/sizes/l/</a><br />check out the grass!</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (huygens)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forum.redump.org/post/18903/#p18903</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
