Digital BW, The Print

Thanks to all who replied on this thread.  The learning curve never
flattens which is one of the things that makes all of this fun.

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark"
<pr_roark@...> wrote:
>
> <e.neilsen2@> wrote:
> >
> ... 
> > 
> > I think a little too much is being made about the 
> > "non destructive" editing of RAW vs PS, ...
> 
> I suspect you're right.
> 
> If the cameras have 14 bit processing internally and we have 16 bits 
> per channel in PS, isn't there more than enough headroom to handle all 
> the information the camera can produce?  (And with high bit RGB files, 
> this is a huge amount of information.)
> 
> I have yet to see evidence of differences when it comes to things like 
> curves.  
> 
> I suspect things like noise reduction might, at least theorectially, be 
> best done by equipment-specific software, just because the 
> manufacturers should know more about their specific products, and, of 
> course, this is a major part of what is going on in the CMOS chips and 
> processors on these new cameras.  But curves, etc. seem rather generic, 
> and, as such, I suspect Photoshop is just as good.
> 
> It would be nice to see some hard evidence.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>