I've read that the stair-step method can be destructive. It introduces
more opportunity for error. My system has no problems with the 144
megabyte files (although it's only a G4, dual 1.25), so that hasn't
really entered into my thinking. I do use a fast and large scratch
disk. That seems to be the most important factor when it comes to
working with large files. And, unless I'm doing a lot of retouching, my
work is almost finished by the time I convert.
Paul
On Oct 19, 2005, at 7:26 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Oct 19, 2005, at 4:10 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
By the way, I almost always convert to the maximum size that the
converter will produce -- a 144 megabyte 16-bit file. Adobe has said
that upsizing (interpolating) in the RAW converter is superior to
doing it after the fact in PhotoShop. ...
That's a bit controversial. I've done upsampling both in the RAW
converter and in Photoshop itself, with a series of different
algorithms. I feel there are times when it works better in Camera Raw
and other times when it works better using a stair-step approach in
Photoshop. It's certainly faster/more responsive to to fundamental
edits in Photoshop on the native resolution than on a 144Mbyte file
... just from the basis of shoving so much data around.
Godfrey
