On 15 Jun 2005 at 1:59, Anthony Farr wrote: > In the "film age" it was only ever diffuse highlights that were expected to > hold some detail. Specular highlights are little mirror images of the sun, or > the prevailing light source, and no sane photographer ever expected them to > carry detail.
Exactly, and now it seems in the realms of digital image capture and critique that some photographers expect the unreasonable. <lots of relevant stuff snipped> > The remedy to excessive output range is as simple as pulling the output > levels back to what the media WILL support. A little experimentation and > some trial & error will reveal what figures are suitable. e.g. IIRC > newsprint halftone is 95% black to 5% white. I've found that when black is > raised to 005, 005, 005 and white is reduced to 250, 250, 250 they still look > black and white, but the detail close to the extremes becomes more visible. > Of > course YMMV. Again this is very pertinent and is now easier than ever to implement in a full digital work-flow, there should be no need to guess or experiment. So long as the print device and media has been correctly profiled any file destined for print should be able to be tailored to optimise the gamut of the printer. That's the theory anyhow, seems to be working for me to this point. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
