For what it's worth: unlike photographers, whose camera output is likely "pretty good" to begin with and thus needing mere tweeking and croping, photo restorers like myself typically start with horrible to fair originals that need MASSIVE "Levels" adjustments, lots of "Cloning", and often extensive color and other improvements. In situations like this, ANYONE can see the significant improvement -- to the histogram as well as to the final output -- using 16-bit files as opposed to 8-bit mode. Of course, once the adjustment layers are flattened and then the whole sharpened, converting to 8-bit mode makes no difference. Howard --- Bob Frost <bob@...> wrote: > John, > > 1 Since the experts can't yet agree whether there is > any benefit to be seen > on the final print of using 16bit files, 'ordinary' > photograpers are > unlikely to notice the difference between working in > 8 bit and 16bit. > > 2 AFAIK there is no advantage in converting 8bit > files to 16bit. > > 3 I doubt that most 'ordinary' photographers use > these corrections. > > 4 Good for 'ordinary' photographers - yes. Good > for you - no. > > 5 For one-tenth of the price of Photoshop CS, it > is very good value for > money IMHO. People who find they must have the > extras of CS can upgrade at a > favourable rate later. > > Bob Frost. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Houghton" <j.houghton@...> > > > > > The support of 16-bit mode in Elements 3 is severely > limited. You > cannot have multiple 16-bit layers of any type. Nor > can you convert > an 8-bit image to 16-bits. You cannot use the > selection brush either > (a sort of quick mask mode substitute). Pathetic, > really. The RAW > converter is also limited in that it does not have > the very useful > options to correct chromatic aberration and > vignetting. Good for > ordinary photographers? I think not. > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page \ufffd Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Copy of Photoshop 7 for Sale?
2004-12-28 by Howard Averbach
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.