I always open up the raw files at the maximum size, 16 bit color depth.
In part, I want the larger size for stock or publication submissions - so I'd rather have the maximum sized image on file and ready to go, on the logic that I can harmlessly downsize if needed. But the rezzed up image directly through the RAW converter also seems to be better than anything I can do even using Genuine Fractals or the new CS resampling techniques. Granted - I don;t usually use a file that size for my own use, so my workflow generally involves opening the file in maximum size and then resampling to a smaller size using the "bicubic - sharper" setting. To my eye, I prefer the sharpening effect from this technique to any of the sharpening filters I've tried..
CS and shooting raw really changed my entire workflow - I pretty much do all global adjustments in the raw converter, and virtually all sharpening during resizing. The only things left to do in Photoshop directly are localized changes (dodge / burn / healing brush, etc.)
FWIW for CS users (this is probably old news, covered here months ago ) - I was one of many people having problems with performance of Photoshop CS. I even resorted to a clean install of WinXP and Photoshop, and bumped the memory on my Athlon 2800+ to 1.5 gigs. But it still crawled. Last week I learned about this "Adjusted Refresh Plug In" - http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=2552 - installing it made a tremendous difference in performance. It still is not as fast as PS 7, but then I'm doing more with 16 bit files, running the browser in the back ground, etc - so I can understand a slight slowdown. I also adjusted _down_ the memory allocation for CS to 50%. This was counter intuitive, but I guess CS calls on Windows more, so Windows needs a bigger share of the memory. With those two changes I see no difference between CS and PS 7 working on 147 meg files (16 bit RAW files opened to max size.) 16 bit 6x7 scans (weighing in at ~400 megs before adding any layers) are still slow, but workable.
- MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is for the few PS experts we have in the list.
When reading in a PEF file with the CS raw converter, do you ever use a higher resolution than the default of 3008x2008? Is there any advantage to this, ie is it any different than resizing the image up later if you have a reason to?
