Well said. Especially the part about future advances in printing technology. Of COURSE I scan and work on everyting in high bit. and save the scans that way. Who wouldn't these days.Now you have just convinced me to save the Finished files that way too. When I produce a 200 meg rgb file ( and some are much bigger) for a client then that becomes a 400 meg file on cd. And I save the scan and the final corrected file. But, I have a super drive so what the hell, I'll buy a ton of dvd's. With your applicatons in greyscale your dealing with files 1/3 that size so it is definitely a no brainer. Right, there are too many things to test. That is why I was probing to see if someone else had done the work for us. We can let it drop now. I'm even boring myself. John > John, for me it's no trouble. Single channel files are still not that > big in hi bit, and storage gets cheaper and cheaper. > Rather than do a slurry of testing that may show different results > with different images hence a multitude of qualifiers to track down, > I'd rather just stay in hi bit the whole way. > Besides, the files may need further editing some day for different > output or whims. > Long ago, testing with a different RIP, I did see a difference, > sometimes. Since the RIP I use accepts hi bit in, I'll just stick with > it to make sure I'm getting the best possible for now. > It's working, and at some point it's more satisfying to make prints > than tests. > Tyler
Message
Tyler's comments Re: 16 bit and printer output
2005-01-14 by john dean
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.