Digital BW, The Print

I've used both QTR and IJC, like both, and might be able to give a bit of
detail here.


>...
> Compared to QTR, IJC/OPM offered more ... more intuitive (but not perfect)
> user interface.

That originally was why I preferred IJC also.  The IJC graphical interface
for the curves allowed an easy transition from making the Photoshop curves.

While QTR (at least for Windows) does not have the same graphical interface,
I now prefer what it does have.  I now work in coordinate numbers (pairs)
that are simply taken from a Photoshop curve shape that I like.  The QTR
curve creation system has a way to simply list 50 points in full 16 bit
depth.  It uses the 0 - 100 scale, but it allows decimals.  This huge number
of points and the depth of each one makes QTR unique among the systems I've
used in terms of the accuracy one can control each of the jets.

So, I simply use a PS curve to give me the approximate initial points.  From
there on, it's the points list.  I use them like sliders, checking the curve
shape with a preview as I go.

>... the transfer curves are applied in 16 bit. 

I think they both are 16 bit now when it comes to applying the curves.  The
QTR limit is that while the curves are high bit depth, the input and (or?)
output files are 8 bit.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com