Digital BW, The Print

Mike,you don need all of that storage space. Once the files are 
ready,flatten,convert to 8bits and save as compressed TIFF. Much less space 
will do...


> Message: 12
>    Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:55:02 -0000
>    From: "J Michael Sullivan" <michael@...>
> Subject: Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
>

 Hence my (and others) need for a terabyte.

> Funny thing, backing up a terabyte ain't no easy task. Think about
> it. And here I can't disagree with you more: Harddisk space is NOT
> free -- there is a REAL cost associated with it, in spite of your
> admonitions to the contrary. And anyone who is prolific with
> photography will encounter this problem sooner rather than later. 16-
> bit can indeed be wasteful.

ummm, the images are already stored on the negatives, aren't they? :)

thant's my solution with 4x5"s any way... unless I have had to go 
through heroics to get a good image I figure I don't need to store 
the scan files after I've printed my edition...

...and my goal is to make negatives that don't require heroics to get 
a print...

mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Andre Vallejo 
<avs@p...> wrote:
> Mike,you don need all of that storage space. Once the files are 
> ready,flatten,convert to 8bits and save as compressed TIFF. Much 
less space 
> will do...
> 
> 
> > Message: 12
> >    Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:55:02 -0000
> >    From: "J Michael Sullivan" <michael@h...>
> > Subject: Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
> >
> 
>  Hence my (and others) need for a terabyte.
> > Funny thing, backing up a terabyte ain't no easy task. Think about
> > it. And here I can't disagree with you more: Harddisk space is NOT
> > free -- there is a REAL cost associated with it, in spite of your
> > admonitions to the contrary. And anyone who is prolific with
> > photography will encounter this problem sooner rather than later. 
16-
> > bit can indeed be wasteful.