Digital BW, The Print

Michael,

I have used Silverfast just as you say. The gamma adjustment brings 
the raw file more to center making adjustments easier. George DeWolfe 
recommends using gamma set to 3.00 as I recall. I have also been 
using Polacolor Insight (waiting for Silverfast to fix a Win 
2000/Firewire bug) for my raw scans. In this software you can make 
full screen levels, curves, etc adjustments then specify a raw scan 
to file. Insight then does the raw scan and applies the changes to 
the file after the scan is complete. Slower but the results seem 
similar.

I believe Silverfast's 48-bit Color is the same as Photoshop's 16-bit 
color. One is looking at the total bits and the other is just 
considering the count on one channel but the data set is the same.

Anyone wanting to know more about Silverfast (or who has Silverfast!) 
should check out Ian Lyon's tutorials 

http://welcome.to/computerdarkroom

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Michael J. Kravit" 
<kravit@b...> wrote:
> Martin,
> 
> From what I have seen, most scanners that have a RAW mode will 
produce dark scans with the data "bunched" up at the shadow end.  
Silverfast has a fairly easy solution to the problem. They have  a 
gamma gradient that is applied to the raw scan before exporting it 
out for use by other programs or Silverfast HDR.
> 
> Under the Frames tab select Option/General and put a check in 
the "for HDR output" box. Set the Gamma Gradation to 1.5, 1.8, or 2.2 
depending on your working space. Basically the program distributes 
the data across the histogram allowing for easier adjustments later.
> 
> I find that I can do the adjustments in SIlverfast HDR or in 
Photoshop. Of course Photoshop converts my 48bit RAW HDR file to a 16 
bit file.
> 
> Basically your "kludge" is doing the same thing.
> Regards,
> 
> Michael J. Kravit, AIA
> Architect/Photographer
> www.kravit.net/photography
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]