Digital Focus: An Easier Way to Print

This is surely the strangest product that I've ever recommended.

Soundbug is a gadget that looks kind of like a computer mouse with a suction cup stuck on its underside. It plugs into any portable music player and plays music like a pocket-size speaker. But here's the rub: It's not a speaker at all. The suction cup attaches to any flat, smooth surface--like a tabletop, door, wall, or window--and Soundbug transforms that surface into a big, planar speaker by making it vibrate. You can play audio from an MP3 player loudly enough to entertain a small group, with fidelity that rates somewhere between an AM and FM radio.

So why am I telling you all this? Recently, I had something of an epiphany. Away on a trip, I was trying to use my PDA to play a slideshow, complete with soundtrack, for a few friends. The PDA's anemic speaker wasn't up to the task, though, and no one could hear the sound. Then I remembered--Soundbug! I pulled it out of my IPod's carrying case, affixed it to a nearby window, and played the slideshow with audio volume to spare. Soundbug suddenly became the essential portable speaker I've always needed for multimedia presentations. Since I show off images and videos on my PDA pretty often, Soundbug is my new best friend.

Soundbug will never be mistaken for a fancy three-piece multimedia speaker system, and the quality of the sound is directly related to the kind of surface you affix it to. But it costs just $39, and it's the most portable speaker you'll ever find. And if nothing else, your audience will applaud your innovativeness in using it.

My flatbed and film scanners have the ability to change aspects of the image (like color and contrast) prior to the actual scan. Of course, it seems more logical to do this in my photo-editing software where I have more tools at my disposal, and I can see what it's doing a little better. Does the pre-scan editing process provide any advantages or should I just scan everything "raw" and fix them in the separate program?

--Brian Lumadue, State College, Pennsylvania

It's odd, isn't it? Most scanners offer to make tweaks to your picture even though you can see the effect only on a tiny little thumbnail view. It would seem to make sense to wait until you can see how the scan came out in a full-screen view within your favorite image editor.

There's a case to be made for both methods, though, and I'll let you decide which is best. While you have more controls and better insight into what changes actually look like if make them an image editor, many changes will be more precise if done when the image is scanned.

Why, you ask? Because the image is sampled more accurately within the scanning program, with far more bits per color. The more bits you have, the more accurately any given color can be represented. (Consider the fact that an 8-bit image can show any one of 256 colors in each pixel, but a 16-bit image can show any one of 65,536 colors in each pixel.) More bit depth also contributes to better highlights and shadows.

Many scanners sample images with as many as 48 bits per pixel, for extremely high color fidelity. (Make sure that the scanner stores the scanned color depth; many inexpensive scanners scan at a high color depth, like 48-bit, but can only store at a lower level, like 24-bit.) Performing a histogram adjustment with billions and billions of color choices allows the scanning program to do a really bang-up job of tweaking your photo. As soon as the scanner spits the photo into your image editor, though, most of that extra color information is stripped away and you're left with a standard JPEG or TIFF image, which can't hold nearly as much color information. Edits to these images will be inherently less accurate.

Do all those extra bits make much of a difference? Sometimes--it depends upon the image and what you plan to do with it. To see for yourself, try it both ways and decide which way works best for you.

Get published, get famous! Each week, we select our favorite reader-submitted photo based on creativity, originality, and technique. Every month, the best of the weekly winners gets a prize valued at between $10 and $100.

A gentle reminder, folks: We disqualify some really wonderful pictures every week because the submissions don't follow the rules. Be sure to include everything we ask for in your e-mail message, including a description of your picture and your complete contact information, or your entry is wasted!

Here's how to enter: Send us your photograph in JPEG format at a resolution no higher than 640 by 480 pixels. Entries at higher resolutions will be immediately disqualified. If necessary, use an image editing program to reduce the file size of your image before e-mailing it to us. Include the title of your photo along with a short description and how you photographed it. Don't forget to send your name, e-mail address, and postal address. Before entering please read the full description of the contest rules and regs.

This week's Hot Pic: "Sunrise Takeoff," by Lawrence J. Murphy, Eatonton, Georgia According to Lawrence, these six geese are taking flight during a misty sunrise on Lake Oconee, Georgia. The picture was taken with a Pentax Optio 330. "I took the picture from my kayak," Laurence says, "and thus was able to get very close before the birds were spooked."

We want your feedback! Send your comments, questions, and suggestions about the newsletter itself to comments@bydavejohnson.com. If you have a question that you'd like to see answered in the weekly Q&A, send it to question@bydavejohnson.com.

For back issues, visit our Digital Photo Tips archive. Sign up to have the Digital Focus Newsletter e-mailed to you each week.