Digital BW, The Print

What you are advocating is a wasteful workflow for those who may have limited 
resources. It certainly is an EXPENSIVE workflow -- hence my assertion of bragging 
rights (which you quickly fell into) for those who, by right of better equipment and 
the latest software, are somehow "greater than thou". Yuch.

There are many on this list who seek to achieve "best practices" without the  
wastefulness of your 16-bit dogma (i.e. 16-bit is always better -- and by implication: 
8-bit users are less than real photographers).

My recommended workfow for most users remains: generate an *optimal* scan, save 
in 8-bit and you have achieved the equivalent of the zone system. You seem to not 
understand the concept of putting the effort into the scan before it gets into 
Photoshop.

Your workflow: scan anyway you want as long as it is in 16-bits. Doesn't matter how 
good or bad it is. Even raw if fine. Then when you have the inclination, fix it up. 
Great. Good for you. But your result (for the vast majority of all B&W images) will be 
as good as an optimal 8-bit workflow. And it still remains wasteful and suggestive of 
"anything less is not worthy of consideration". Talk about demogogery. Not everyone 
has Photoshop CS. Not everyone has 2gb ram. Not everyone has 1 Terabyte of hd. 

(however I do).

mjs



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "J Michael
> Sullivan" <michael@h...> wrote:
> 
> big snip...
> I'm sorry Michael, but I take issue with almost every point you make.
> But it seems everyone is sick of this discussion so I won't respond
> with the mini-novel point for point response simmering in my brain.
> 
> > P.S. assuming someone has unlimited memory & harddisk space then go
> ahead, scan 
> > away at 16 bits -- at least there is no harm!
> 
> Well there you go, and that's the point.
> By the way, 16 bit gray files are still a snap compared to even the 8
> bit RGB or CMYK files we deal with every day.
> 
> > P.P.S in my experience, a lot of the 16bit vs 8bit argument involves
> a perverse form of 
> > bragging --
> 
> Thank you sir, I guess I'm overdue for some soul searching. In the
> meantime I'll continue labor under the illusion that most of us here
> are trying to optimize our workflows to approach the very high
> standards set by a legacy of amazing B&W photography. I can see
> justifying working in 8 bit gray, but I can't see advocating it.
> Tyler