> > I hope you will persevere with me on this and I hope people like Roy are > listening in. > > Like that LAB! > > Steve > Hi Steve, I've actually been following the thread all along and it sure has sparked a lot of interesting questions. I like comparing things and linearizing in Lab because it's supposed to the ideal match for human vision. I.e. linear Lab ought to be linear visually -- in other words a difference from Lab 15 to 20 (5%) is comparable to a difference from Lab 50 to 55 (also 5%) and Lab 85 to 90. This makes sense as the best use of the 256 values you get for an 8bit data file. Unfortunately Photoshop doesn't have a Lab oriented grayspace. We could use Lab spaces but first they have 3 channels so your files will be triple the size with no more info. Second I think when you print, PS will get you "out of Lab" in the conversion to grayscale doing a profile mapping for you (or is it to you :) ). The main reason I've always used gray gamma 2.2 along with adobe RGB is that with the eye dropper you can see the 8 bit values in the file. K gives only 0-100 but underneath its really 0-255. You can see 0-255 in the RGB values but they are only correct if the gray and color spaces have the same gamma. (Profile conversions are always going on). Roy
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Tonal range and linearization
2004-12-07 by Roy Harrington
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.