I do not recall a single post where someone demanded detail in specular
highlights. Methinks you guys are beating a dead horse here.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Rob Studdert wrote:
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
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.2/14 - Release Date: 6/14/2005
