Digital BW, The Print

I use a Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n (13.7 Mp) and  Nikon P7000 (10.1 Mp) both shot in RAW

I edit using a W7 PC with PW Pro and print with QTR.
I convert to monochrome using Transformation, Extract Channel and Transformation, Composite.

I print at A4 on Epson Enhanced Matte using an Epson Stylus Photo 1290 with MIS UT2 inks (I also use the Epson 2100 with QTR and Epson UC inks with Matte Black with equally good results).

I now wish to print monochrome at A3 from the image shot in colour with the P7000 (it's easier to carry round) - obviously the image may be cropped making the file size even smaller.

My question is should I upsample in 48 bit before converting to monochrome ?

Mel

"Mel" <chilterns@...> wrote:
>
> ... Nikon P7000 (10.1 Mp) ... shot in RAW
> 
> ...
> I now wish to print monochrome ...

> My question is should I upsample in 48 bit before converting to monochrome ?

Doesn't your raw converter allow you to have a 16 bit/channel (48 bit) RGB output?  If not, I think I'd consider a different workflow to get from Raw to a grayscale file at the outset.

If the camera/raw converter combo results in 24 bit RGB no matter what you do, then I would convert to 16 bit/channel RGB before converting further to 16 bit grayscale. 

Ideally, a conversion engine would do this automatically, but with Photoshop, which is what I usually use, there is no way I know of to go directly from 24 bit RGB to 16 bit grayscale. So, I go to 16 bit/channel RGB first, then 16 bit grayscale.

I hope this is somewhat responsive.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Yes Paul, PW Pro converts from RAW to TIFF sRGB 48 bit.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <roark.paul@...> wrote:

>
> "Mel" <chilterns@> wrote:
> >
> > ... Nikon P7000 (10.1 Mp) ... shot in RAW
> > 
> > ...
> > I now wish to print monochrome ...
> 
> > My question is should I upsample in 48 bit before converting to monochrome ?
> 
> Doesn't your raw converter allow you to have a 16 bit/channel (48 bit) RGB output?  If not, I think I'd consider a different workflow to get from Raw to a grayscale file at the outset.
> 
> If the camera/raw converter combo results in 24 bit RGB no matter what you do, then I would convert to 16 bit/channel RGB before converting further to 16 bit grayscale. 
> 
> Ideally, a conversion engine would do this automatically, but with Photoshop, which is what I usually use, there is no way I know of to go directly from 24 bit RGB to 16 bit grayscale. So, I go to 16 bit/channel RGB first, then 16 bit grayscale.
> 
> I hope this is somewhat responsive.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

"Mel" <chilterns@...> wrote:
>
> Yes Paul, PW Pro converts from RAW to TIFF sRGB 48 bit.
> 

So, is the issue upsampling in high 16 bit grayscale v. 48 bit sRGB?  That is, you want the best grayscale file, but at a higher resolution.

If so, my experience with Genuine Fractals is that I am better off converting to 16 bit grayscale before up-sampling to a higher resolution file.  I leave the up-sampling to near the end of my work, but before any sharpening.

I know many do not favor Genuine Fractals, and there may be very good or better ways to up-sample.  However, with my current setup GF seems to do a better job than Photoshop, so it's what I use. 

I suspect the camera system used may be relevant.  I believe (and have been told by a JPL employee) that, at least with sensors that do not have diffusion filters in front of them, there is sub-pixel size information that can be useful.  It may be that different systems are more able to decode or utilize that information, which may be more available in cameras that do not use the diffusion/AA filters.  So, what works best for up-sampling may vary with the camera type.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

So probably best to convert to greyscale before upsampling.

PW Pro uses Bicubic, Nearest Neighbor, Bilinear or Lanczos 4 x 4, 6 x 6 or 8 x 8 during resizing.

If I upsample say from A4 size to A3 wouldn't I get a lower res. image ?

Mel

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <roark.paul@...> wrote:

>
> "Mel" <chilterns@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes Paul, PW Pro converts from RAW to TIFF sRGB 48 bit.
> > 
> 
> So, is the issue upsampling in high 16 bit grayscale v. 48 bit sRGB?  That is, you want the best grayscale file, but at a higher resolution.
> 
> If so, my experience with Genuine Fractals is that I am better off converting to 16 bit grayscale before up-sampling to a higher resolution file.  I leave the up-sampling to near the end of my work, but before any sharpening.
> 
> I know many do not favor Genuine Fractals, and there may be very good or better ways to up-sample.  However, with my current setup GF seems to do a better job than Photoshop, so it's what I use. 
> 
> I suspect the camera system used may be relevant.  I believe (and have been told by a JPL employee) that, at least with sensors that do not have diffusion filters in front of them, there is sub-pixel size information that can be useful.  It may be that different systems are more able to decode or utilize that information, which may be more available in cameras that do not use the diffusion/AA filters.  So, what works best for up-sampling may vary with the camera type.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

You should use one of the Lanczos options.  If you're upsizing, you'll get
more pixels in the image, but you won't get any more detail.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for that Peter, yes I'm now using Lanczos 8 x 8

Not looking for more detail, that would be a miracle, just looking for minimal losses.

Mel

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pdesmidt tds.net" <pdesmidt@...> wrote:

>
> You should use one of the Lanczos options.  If you're upsizing, you'll get
> more pixels in the image, but you won't get any more detail.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

There are many ways to re-size.  One thing I do is to re-size to 10% bigger
than required.  Do a little sharpening, and then downsize to the final size,
again with a little sharpening.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Peter, that sounds like a good final tweak.

Mel

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pdesmidt tds.net" <pdesmidt@...> wrote:

>
> There are many ways to re-size.  One thing I do is to re-size to 10% bigger
> than required.  Do a little sharpening, and then downsize to the final size,
> again with a little sharpening.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>