On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 13:37:46 +0100 Oostrom, Jerry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> What I have done however, until recently, is make a lot of high-bit scans of
> color negative film, let vuescan code them in ProPhotoRGB, do my color
> adjustments and convert to 8-bit files for archiving. My priorities were: 1
> archiving, 2 monitor viewing, 3 web use, 4 printing.
> I think now the approach taken was wrong for my priorities.
> * I should either have converted to a smaller gamut space just before
> converting to 8-bit, or
> * should never have edited in ProPhotoRGB but in a smaller gamut color
> space or
> * should have archived the 16-bit files instead (I am reluctant to do
> this, I have a little crowded home)
I think that if you don't want to do (3), what you are doing is fine. You have avoided
the major wreckage of values by editing in 16 bits before reducing to 8 bits.
Subsequently converting to a smaller gamut space should theoretically be better done
in high bit mode, but I doubt it will make any visible difference - at least none that
isn't swamped by other considerations. I mean: every time I print an image I have to
reprofile it for the printer, and it's in 8 bits. Plenty of other things go awry, but
damage to the histogram is not one of them.
If it makes you feel any better, I archive to 8bit files too. The reason: I can only
get 10 TIFF's on a CD as it is, and they have to be in a readily accessible and
finished form I can send to clients.
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info &
comparisons
