ok. yes. thank you!
so i converted it to greyscale as it is not giving me any color options and the rotation arbitrary works now.
can i just please ask you why bitmap mode doesn't allow for arbitrary rotation so i understand this?
also, can i also ask you why this /scan/ will not convert to RGB? i mean, presumably the guy that ran the scan did it as a greyscale (i have a tiff and a pdf version that he gave me...) and since greyscale has not color i can't convert it to RBG? i mean, if i went from RGB to color it would /ask/ me if i wanted to trash any color values so basically this is why this image won't have any color associated with it.
and i would have to run the scan again to get color values...?
It might be that the rotations other than 90 degree increments need interpolation methods that don't work well in the bitmap mode because your limited to only two colors.
( if i'm wrong about the above, perhaps Chris Cox will give the correct reason)
Do you need more than two colors in the image?
You should be able to go to RGB Color after Grayscale, which i should have said in my first response, but you don't need to unless you need more than two colors in the image.
Was the image a color image before the scan?
Though I should know better, this bit me just yesterday with a scanned B/W Image. Nothing was working. Pull some hair. Still nothing working. Mumble some bad words. Checked Image Mode = Bitmap - DUH! Luckily, I did not loose THAT much hair, but still sat for longer than I should have had to.
hi guys. thanks so much. i am learning to figure something out instead of constantly working around things i don't know.
can i please follow up on a couple things here?
i am understanding (sort of) that bitmap won't accept arbitraty rotations. i guess this makes "visual sense" in that arbitrarily rotating square pixels will look sort of stupid and while i think it /should/ be possible i guess there might be something written into the bitmap code that prevents this?
anyway - can anyone help me with an issue i have? i scanned TWO large format images at kinkos after having taken them out of a frame. i then scanned them while there was a big crazy festival downtown and the scanner was (of course) acting up. long story short is that i ended up with two files with ONE of the files (bith being tiff) being exceptionally small in terms of size. of course no one at the shop knew why and they were not able to assure me there would not be a problem.
so i go home with the scans - drop off the prints to get reframed and now - well now i am here.
BOTH images seem to be exceptionally /pixelated/ so when there should be a line there is like a comet of pixels (when zoomed in) and there are a ton of stray pixels on each of these images. one is a reasonably sized image and the other is sized in KB.
anyone happen to know what i should look at in terms of what i ended up with or what happened to get me bitmap and what bitmap is? i mean, i assume there was some bitmap setting and this implies low resolution or all black and white or exceptionally pixelated (or maybe the amount of pixelation depends instead on what RESOLUTION they were run at??).
anyway, i have in fact tried to research this kind of thing but i guess i am trying to learn by doing with this one...
Thanks for any help on this issue...
Scan in grayscale to pick up more detail.
And yes, the resolution will determine how much detail you capture plus the level of pixelization.
But higher resolutions may also show more defects (dust, scratches, etc.).
Usually you capture at the highest optical resolution of the scanner, and the highest quality mode (gray, RGB) that makes sense for the item being scanned -- then clean it up and convert down as necessary.