Digital BW, The Print

I agree.  I save everything in 16-bit.  Since that's the current best, why
not?  The cost of storage is minimal compared to everything else we have
tied up.  I do save the "final" version unsharpened.  That is because
sharpening is the last step, and new sharpening tools appear from time to
time.  I note the file as "NS" (no sharpening at all).  One exception is
where there is a complicated sharpening scheme, such as selective sharpening
with the brushes in PK Sharpener.  Then I'll save the image as "NFS" (not
final sharpened, in the case of PK Sharpener).  An easier case is the
soft-proofed image ready to go the printer.  There I just save the curve,
hue/saturation or whatever adjustments in a separate directory with the
print file name.

But, I wonder how many of us (who don't do high volume printing) really have
"final" images?  I recall the painter (memory fails right now, I think it
was Claude Monet) who had to be watched in galleries, since he would carry a
small palette under his coat and touch up his paintings hanging on the
walls.  If I have the name right, he would have liked 16-bit.

Ken

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
> Behalf Of Steve Gledhill
> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 2:55 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: 16 Bit vs 8 bit archiiving
> 
> Surely the answer to any dilemma here over what to save is to 
> archive two versions of any image.  One being the 'final' 
> version which represents your current best digital 
> interpretation of your captured image (digital or film) - or 
> indeed several different 'final' versions; and the second 
> being the 16 bit unadjusted image as captured digitally or 
> scanned.  Then you can go back to square one as many times as 
> you want in future and start all over again!