Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Taxes (was Re: [OM] scanned res for 4C output?)

Subject: Taxes (was Re: [OM] scanned res for 4C output?)
From: Jan Steinman <jans@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 10:59:13 -0700
>Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 19:10:37 -0700
>From: "Shawn Wright" <swright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
...
>... is there any advantage to scanning at 2700,
>and having photoshop scale it down?

I suspect the opposite -- your scanner firmware is working at a greater bit
depth, and I'll bet its interpolation will be more accurate than
Photoshop's at a mere 24 bits.

General rule: try to get as much work done where the most information is.
In your case, I believe your Coolscan works with 30 bits internally, so
anything you can do in the scanner will be better than what you can do in
Photoshop, assuming the firmware developers did their job. It may not be
*detectably* better, but in theory, it should be better.

(It may be worth comparing to make sure it isn't worse -- firmware
developers don't always do their jobs... :-)

>One more question - what would a typical charge be to supply a
>cover shot for a small brochure, with a run of approx 5000 - 10,000
>copies? I won't actually be charging this rate, but am thinking of
>donating my work at a specified dollar value...

"At a specified dollar value" for what purpose? Resume fodder?

Note that the IRS will not allow you to deduct work you do for charitable
purposes, although it will allow you to deduct mileage and actual
incidental expenses incurred while performing charitable work. If your
purpose was taxes, forget the "typical charge" and keep careful track of
your mileage and actual out-of-pocket expenses related to the donated work.

Now for the requisite Oly content: I think I just bought an Oly slide
copier through a net deal. From the photo, I'm not sure how it works. I
have a set of auto-extension rings, 50/3.5 macro, and bellows. From photos,
it looks like it attaches to the front of a 49mm (filter size) lens, is
that right? If so, how do you use it with a reversed lens? I understand I
should reverse my 50/3.5 macro for best flat-field performance at 1:1. TIA!


: Jan Steinman <mailto:jans@xxxxxxxxxxx>
: 19280 Rydman Court, West Linn, OR 97068-1331 USA
: +1.503.635.3229

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz