Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "tomoc" <TomOC@s...> 
wrote:
> Hi all-
> 
> I thought Austin was going to address this in the last 16/8 
thread, 
> but it died <g>.
> 
> Do you think there is any advantage gained from converting an 
8 bit 
> image (usually a .jpg from a Nikon 5000) to 16 bit before doing 
any 
> adjustments in PS?.
> 
> I've been do it just to make the Silver Oxide filter easier to use, 
> but I feel like it might just be giving me smoother prints. 
Doesn't 
> make sense, but it seems that way.
> 
> Any idea what would the proper test be? Other than "how it 
looks?"
> 
> Tom O'Connell

Hi Tom,

Well if you convert the 8 bit data to 16 bits, your 256 possible
levels from the input will still be just 256 levels.  All simple
tonal changes such as levels or curves will still have only 256
levels i.e. no single level can split up into 2 levels so how can
you possibly get more levels.   That said, staying in 8 bit its
more likely that you will lose levels (i.e. 2 different levels
merge into 1) but then you probably didn't care about 
distinguishing them anyway.     Considering how difficult it
has been to "prove" that keeping 16 bits is worth it when you 
already have many more that 256 levels, I wouldn't bother
converting 8 to 16.

You mention using jpgs from the Nikon 5000.  Using the tiff
output would benefit the final output a whole lot more than
worring about 16 bit mode.  The other major thing to do is
check how good the data is right when you take the picture.
Doesn't the 5000 allow you to view the histogram immediately?

Roy