Sign not sigh!!!!
Benoît
-----Original
Message-----
From: Benoit Malphettes
[mailto:Benoit@...]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001
10:26 PM
To:
'DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE:
[DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] Scanning workflow for BW
;
Thanks Martin to invite me to this newsgroup, I already sent a note to invite PhilBard here and I see that Antonis is already here! Good people. So hi, everyone!
mmm…is it a sigh of maturity to be here on a Saturday evening LOL
Benoît
-----Original
Message-----
From: antonisphoto@yahoo.com
[mailto:antonisphoto@...]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001
10:09 PM
To:
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject:
[DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] Scanning workflow for BW
George,
it's great to "see" you here. Thanks for joining our inaugural
discussions. You
raised a whole bunch of hot issues each of which calls for a new thread.
I'll start with the scan workflow. You wrote:
>>>
Scanning protocols are also problematical. Silverfast is the only
third pary scanning software that allows you to make your own
LUT's. I've fooled around and come up with N+1, N-1 and N+2
LUT's, and they work well - in 8 bit, of course. Both Mike Kravit
and I scan in 16, drop down into 8 bit Silverfast HDR and
optimize the image before it even gets into Photoshop. What do
you guys do at the scanning stage? What works consistenly?<<<
While I see the point of scanning in 16bit, I don't see that as necessary a
priori. It seems to me a matter of whether or not you have enough control
in
the scanner interface to let the scanner spit out an 8bit file where
the tones
are laid out as best they can without local controls. The Crosfield
at BowHaus
in Los Angeles, only outputs 8bits, for example, but they are
"great" 8bits,
because of how it's driven.
With less capable scanners and drivers, the 16bit is a workaround t o allow
Photoshop to do the heavy lifting. That's all I see in it for now. All this
may
change if Adobe implements 16bits across everything.
However, considering that the upcoming release of PiezoBW software will
allow for 16bit printing on the desktop, there will be the dilemma: If you
didn't
scan it in 16bit and _stayed_ in 16bit, what's the use? Which means that
the
brave printer must scan in 16, do all the other maneuvers needed to fake
layers and masks and produce a printing file without ever dropping to 8.
For
some who need only one overall move, this may be the ideal and highest
possible quality. I suspect, for most, it will not be used untill Photoshop
embraces 16 more fully.
Here now is a workflow idea (8 or 16bits) that I would like to post
for feedback
and comments:
-The scan of the negative or other monochrome original is done in RGB (8 or
16) and saved out of the scanner software with the appropriate
profile.
- The file is opened in photoshop for tonal adjustments while still in RGB.
But
before starting, we check our color settings (this assumes PS 6).
----Under gray we have created a curve that matches the paper/ink/printer
we
intend to use. That means that a _grayscale file_ on screen will look
identical
to a print made under those settings.
----Under RGB we set the same color space that the file came from, so that
the
intentions of the scanner and our view in PS match. The only real critical
number here is the gamma.
- We now do global and local adjustments as needed while still in RGB mode.
The critical step in this workflow is to stay in RGB. At this point we have
the
option to add a channel mixer set to mono as the top layer (if in 8bits)
which
does 2 things: Helps us see a consistent gray-color image, and allows us to
pick whatever mix of scanner channels looks best (more important for CCD
users).
- After we are happy with the look of the image, we make a dupe of the
file,
flatten (if it was 8bits) and convert to grayscale. We notice that the file
looks
exactly the same in grayscale as it did in RGB. What in fact has happened
is
that Photoshop has internally "adapted" the RGB file to the Gray
settings we
previously set, which compensated for our paper/ink/printer. It is like
putting it
through a custom profile made for our specific output.
- We now take that grayscale and go to piezo and print with no further
adjustments. I bet that histogram will look pretty damn good now.
We have gained several things from this simultaneous drop to gray and match
the output device.
-We have a master file in RGB from which subsequent gray files can be made
for different papers just as one would for color. Alternatively, a
neutral
conversion can be produced (for other uses), based on a gray gamma that
simply matches the RGB gamma of the file.
- We have used all the information our scanner is capable of by utilizing
all its
channels with whatever benefits they each may have in noise, sharpness etc.
- We have done no moves in the fragile 8bit gray mode. We stand a chance at
a better histogram depending on whether we move all 3 channels at once or
separately.
That's the general idea: work in RGB, drop to a pre-calibrated gray when
done
and print with no other tweaks.
I hope we can compare notes on the above.
Antonis Ricos
If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you
may
unsubscribe by sending an email to:
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of
Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
unsubscribe by sending an email to:
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.