Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

2004-02-13 by sceptre12345

I've been asking myself if I should go ahead with a digital camera 
for b&w prints. Up to now, I've not had much success with b&w prints 
from digital camera. I get posterisation and the skin texture in 
portraits are not what I looking for.

But now there is a new crop of 8 mp digital camera and i'm wondering 
if the time has arrived to make the plunge.

So, I went to Canon's site where there are picture samples of an 8mp 
camera. 

I chose sample #6, because there's lot of black area where 
posterisation would show, converted it to b&w and printed it at 
12"x18" without resampling using the UT inkset.

I'm still wondering if I like the skin texture and tones.

So, if you want to try it out, here the link:

http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/eos1dm2_sample-e.html

Cheers,
Andre

RE: [Digital BW] DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

2004-02-13 by Richard

-----Original Message-----
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: sceptre12345 [mailto:am1000@...] 
Sent: 13 February 2004 20:07
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

I've been asking myself if I should go ahead with a digital camera 
for b&w prints. Up to now, I've not had much success with b&w prints 
from digital camera. I get posterisation and the skin texture in 
portraits are not what I looking for.

I chose sample #6, because there's lot of black area where 
posterisation would show, converted it to b&w and printed it at 
12"x18" without resampling using the UT inkset.

I'm still wondering if I like the skin texture and tones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not very sharp to say the least.
I have a B&W portrait from the 1Ds that really shows the quality of an 11mp
SLR and I doubt that you could fault it.

Richard




---
[This E-mail has been scanned for viruses but it is your responsibility 
to maintain up to date anti virus software on the device that you are
currently using to read this email. ]

DSLR? depends.....

2004-02-13 by ckayakman

The new crop of 8mp cameras are limited by sensor size, if you want 
to go digital you will find better image quality in the larger sensor 
6 mp offerings from Canon (10D, 300) Nikon (D100, D70) Fuji (S2, 
S3).  Many photographers feel these cameras offer imaging superior to 
35mm.  The Canon uses CMOS, others CCD.  I like the CMOS.  See the 
editorial in latest "Lenswork".

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Richard" 
<richard@r...> wrote:
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sceptre12345 [mailto:am1000@v...] 
> Sent: 13 February 2004 20:07
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?
> 
> I've been asking myself if I should go ahead with a digital camera 
> for b&w prints. Up to now, I've not had much success with b&w 
prints 
> from digital camera. I get posterisation and the skin texture in 
> portraits are not what I looking for.
> 
> I chose sample #6, because there's lot of black area where 
> posterisation would show, converted it to b&w and printed it at 
> 12"x18" without resampling using the UT inkset.


> I'm still wondering if I like the skin texture and tones.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> It's not very sharp to say the least.
> I have a B&W portrait from the 1Ds that really shows the quality of 
an 11mp
> SLR and I doubt that you could fault it.
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> [This E-mail has been scanned for viruses but it is your 
responsibility 
> to maintain up to date anti virus software on the device that you 
are
> currently using to read this email. ]

Re: DSLR? depends.....

2004-02-13 by sceptre12345

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ckayakman" 
<ckayakman@y...> wrote:
> The new crop of 8mp cameras are limited by sensor size, if you want 
> to go digital you will find better image quality in the larger 
sensor 
> 6 mp offerings from Canon (10D, 300) Nikon (D100, D70) Fuji (S2, 
> S3).  

The new 8mp camera have a sensor size of 19.1 x 28.7 while the 6 mp 
cameras have a sensor size of 15.6 x 23.7. The 8mp camera also have a 
larger pixel size, 8.2 x 8.2 versus 7.8x7.8 for the new  Nikon D70 
for example.

But, that was not the gist of my post. I know about technical details 
and frankly i'm bored with them. What I'm concerned about is image 
quality.

Cheers,
Andre

Re: [Digital BW] Re: DSLR? depends.....

2004-02-13 by Allan Chen

Just curious, where did you get those numbers from?  The 8mp sensors are 
2/3" ones I believe.  That would mean they are all 8.8m x 6.6mm.  The 
APS-sized sensors in the Nikon DSLR's are all 25.1mm x 16.7mm.  That's a 
considerably size difference.

And, in this case, the numbers are very important to the image 
quality.  The smaller sensors will produce more noise than the larger 
ones.  So far, the Sony 8mp 828 has had significant noise issues (though 
some argue that it's "really not that bad" once you run it through a noise 
cleaning program like Neat Image).  It is unknown whetehr the offerings 
from Nikon (8700), KM (A2), Olympus (8080), and Canon (Pro 1) will have 
come up with some better noise-controlling algorithm or whatever.

But the bigger sensors in the DSLR's certainly should make a rather large 
difference in terms of noise.
allan

At 01:24 PM 2/13/2004, you wrote:
>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ckayakman"
><ckayakman@y...> wrote:
> > The new crop of 8mp cameras are limited by sensor size, if you want
> > to go digital you will find better image quality in the larger
>sensor
> > 6 mp offerings from Canon (10D, 300) Nikon (D100, D70) Fuji (S2,
> > S3).
>
>The new 8mp camera have a sensor size of 19.1 x 28.7 while the 6 mp
>cameras have a sensor size of 15.6 x 23.7. The 8mp camera also have a
>larger pixel size, 8.2 x 8.2 versus 7.8x7.8 for the new  Nikon D70
>for example.
>
>But, that was not the gist of my post. I know about technical details
>and frankly i'm bored with them. What I'm concerned about is image
>quality.
>
>Cheers,
>Andre
>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
>they are often being updated.
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
>unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
>page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
>them short.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
>Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
>membership without notice.
>- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
>printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
>the membership.
>- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
>guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner 
>and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
>BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
>YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
>"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
>YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
>EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
>PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
>THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE 
>BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE 
>USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) 
>UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) 
>STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
>YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
>PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-----------------------------------------
Technology Projects Manager
Academic Computing & Office of Accessible Education
Stanford University
voice - 650-996-0546
fax  -   650-725-8495

[Digital BW] Re: DSLR? depends.....

2004-02-13 by sceptre12345

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen 
<kaiyen@s...> wrote:
> Just curious, where did you get those numbers from?  The 8mp 
sensors are 
> 2/3" ones I believe.  That would mean they are all 8.8m x 6.6mm.  
The 
> APS-sized sensors in the Nikon DSLR's are all 25.1mm x 16.7mm.  
That's a 
> considerably size difference.

For technical details see:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6451-6636-6638

(Copy and paste is the link is truncated)

Seems were getting bogged down in technical details.

Anyone can comment on sample image quality as it applies to b&w 
digital printing   

Sample image at:
http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/eos1dm2_sample-e.html

Cheers,
Andre

Re: [Digital BW] Re: DSLR? depends.....

2004-02-13 by Allan Chen

OH.

Sorry, didn't realize you were referring to the 1d Mark II.  Forgot about 
that one being 8mp.  I thought you meant the "prosumer" ones using the Sony 
chip.

my bad.
allan

At 01:47 PM 2/13/2004, you wrote:
>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen
><kaiyen@s...> wrote:
> > Just curious, where did you get those numbers from?  The 8mp
>sensors are
> > 2/3" ones I believe.  That would mean they are all 8.8m x 6.6mm.
>The
> > APS-sized sensors in the Nikon DSLR's are all 25.1mm x 16.7mm.
>That's a
> > considerably size difference.
>
>For technical details see:
>http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6451-6636-6638
>
>(Copy and paste is the link is truncated)
>
>Seems were getting bogged down in technical details.
>
>Anyone can comment on sample image quality as it applies to b&w
>digital printing
>
>Sample image at:
>http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/eos1dm2_sample-e.html
>
>Cheers,
>Andre
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
>they are often being updated.
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
>unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
>page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
>them short.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
>Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
>membership without notice.
>- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
>printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
>the membership.
>- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
>guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner 
>and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
>BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
>YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
>"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
>YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
>EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
>PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
>THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE 
>BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE 
>USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) 
>UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) 
>STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
>YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
>PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-----------------------------------------
Technology Projects Manager
Academic Computing & Office of Accessible Education
Stanford University
voice - 650-996-0546
fax  -   650-725-8495

Re: [Digital BW] Re: DSLR? depends.....

2004-02-13 by Billy Cobb

... what 'dre said!

BC
Show quoted textHide quoted text
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: sceptre12345 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 3:24 PM
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: DSLR? depends.....


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ckayakman" 
  <ckayakman@y...> wrote:
  > The new crop of 8mp cameras are limited by sensor size, if you want 
  > to go digital you will find better image quality in the larger 
  sensor 
  > 6 mp offerings from Canon (10D, 300) Nikon (D100, D70) Fuji (S2, 
  > S3).  

  The new 8mp camera have a sensor size of 19.1 x 28.7 while the 6 mp 
  cameras have a sensor size of 15.6 x 23.7. The 8mp camera also have a 
  larger pixel size, 8.2 x 8.2 versus 7.8x7.8 for the new  Nikon D70 
  for example.

  But, that was not the gist of my post. I know about technical details 
  and frankly i'm bored with them. What I'm concerned about is image 
  quality.

  Cheers,
  Andre



  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
  - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
  - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

  BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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

RE: [Digital BW] DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

2004-02-13 by Paul D. DeRocco

> From: sceptre12345 [mailto:am1000@...]
>
> I've been asking myself if I should go ahead with a digital camera
> for b&w prints. Up to now, I've not had much success with b&w prints
> from digital camera. I get posterisation and the skin texture in
> portraits are not what I looking for.

What leads you to believe that the posterization is caused by the fact that
it comes from a digital camera? There are two things that prevent
posterization: more bit depth, and more noise. The Canon 10D is quiet enough
at low ISO that you may get posterization in B&W mode if you do 8-bit
processing, but that would be true of any low-noise image, even if scanned
from film. I haven't seen any posterization printing B&W from my 10D, but I
do everything in 16-bit in PS CS.

As to skin texture, I don't know--that's purely subjective.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Re: [Digital BW] DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

2004-02-14 by Kip Babington

I have to wonder if a less-than-2 Mb file gives a solid basis for making a 
value judgement about the overall quality available from a particular camera.

Cheers,
Kip

At 2/13/2004 08:06 PM +0000, you wrote:

>I've been asking myself if I should go ahead with a digital camera
>for b&w prints. Up to now, I've not had much success with b&w prints
>from digital camera. I get posterisation and the skin texture in
>portraits are not what I looking for.
<snip>

RE: [Digital BW] DSLR -- Is it t ime yet ?

2004-02-14 by Ken Carney

Here's one more to think about:

 If you and your browser can handle Japanese, check this out:

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0213/pma05.htm

At PMA 2004, Epson is showing a rangefinder based digital camera.  One panel
says the camera was designed and engineered by Epson and developed with
partnership with Cosina.  Apparently, the body is based on
Cosina-Voigtlander's Bessa R series, and apparently, the lens mount is Leica
M mount. Details haven't been disclosed yet, and Epson said they'll announce
more about this camera in March.

Re: DSLR? Re Image quality

2004-02-14 by ckayakman

Quote from Brooks Jensen, editor LensWork (Feb-March 04)
"after critical examination of these 8x10 photographs we all 
concluded that they looked, for all practical reasons, as good as a 
contact print made from an 8x10 view camera negative!  They were tack 
sharp, full of detail, with very smooth tones and absolutly no 
digital artifact.  Ive known, intellectually, that digital 
photography might someday have the potential to challenge film based 
photography when it comes to image results, but, quite honestly, I 
had no idea we had come this far this quickly"

This guy has seen a few black and white prints.
No doubt there will be a niche for film based photography in the 
future :>.

Re: DSLR? Re Image quality

2004-02-14 by sceptre12345

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ckayakman" 
<ckayakman@y...> wrote:
> Quote from Brooks Jensen, editor LensWork (Feb-March 04)
> "after critical examination of these 8x10 photographs we all 
> concluded that they looked, for all practical reasons, as good as a 
> contact print made from an 8x10 view camera negative!  They were 
tack 
> sharp, full of detail, with very smooth tones and absolutly no 
> digital artifact.  

I see that they are talking about 8x10" prints and I would absolutely 
agree. But my concern is about larger prints, more like an 12x18" b&w 
inkjet prints.

If Mr. Jensen would have the same praise about a 12x18 b&w print 
originating from an 6 or 8mp dslr, then I'd be a buyer.

Cheers,
Andre

printing b&w from the canon 10D

2004-02-14 by julie stapen

I use the 10D and have seen slight posterization in
B&W's as well. I'm confused on all the terminology
though... what is 16 bit in PS-CS? I'd love to try... 
Do you first change it to grayscale in photoshop and
then convert it to 16 bit color? I use photoshop 7 on
mac osx. Also I've seen a lot on using curves, is that
better than using levels?
Thanks so much!!
Julie
--- "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...> wrote:
> > From: sceptre12345 [mailto:am1000@...]
> >
> > I've been asking myself if I should go ahead with
> a digital camera
> > for b&w prints. Up to now, I've not had much
> success with b&w prints
> > from digital camera. I get posterisation and the
> skin texture in
> > portraits are not what I looking for.
> 
> What leads you to believe that the posterization is
> caused by the fact that
> it comes from a digital camera? There are two things
> that prevent
> posterization: more bit depth, and more noise. The
> Canon 10D is quiet enough
> at low ISO that you may get posterization in B&W
> mode if you do 8-bit
> processing, but that would be true of any low-noise
> image, even if scanned
> from film. I haven't seen any posterization printing
> B&W from my 10D, but I
> do everything in 16-bit in PS CS.
> 
> As to skin texture, I don't know--that's purely
> subjective.
> 
> --
> 
> Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
> Paul                mailto:pderocco@...
> 
> 

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Re: printing b&w from the canon 10D

2004-02-14 by sceptre12345

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, julie stapen 
<jsstapen@y...> wrote:
> I use the 10D and have seen slight posterization in
> B&W's as well. I'm confused on all the terminology
> though... what is 16 bit in PS-CS? I'd love to try... 
> Do you first change it to grayscale in photoshop and
> then convert it to 16 bit color? I use photoshop 7 on
> mac osx. Also I've seen a lot on using curves, is that
> better than using levels?
> Thanks so much!!
> Julie

Use the PS RAW plug-in and convert your .CRW file to 16 bits there.

If you have a JPEG file, I doubt that it would make any difference 
converting it to 16 bits in Photoshop.

Cheers,
Andre

RE: [Digital BW] printing b&w from the canon 10D

2004-02-14 by Paul D. DeRocco

> From: julie stapen [mailto:jsstapen@...]
>
> I use the 10D and have seen slight posterization in
> B&W's as well. I'm confused on all the terminology
> though... what is 16 bit in PS-CS? I'd love to try...
> Do you first change it to grayscale in photoshop and
> then convert it to 16 bit color? I use photoshop 7 on
> mac osx. Also I've seen a lot on using curves, is that
> better than using levels?

First of all, you have to shoot in raw mode, since JPEGs are only eight bits
per channel. Second, since you only have PS7, you'll probably be doing raw
conversion outside of PS. (The new PS CS has a very good raw converter
built-in.) When you do the conversion, save to 16-bit-per-channel TIFF. (It
might be called 48-bit TIFF.) When you open this in Photoshop, you'll be in
16-bit mode, and you'll notice that lots of editing features are disabled.
PS CS fixes this, which is a good reason for upgrading. But you can use
Curves, Levels, Hue/Sat, etc., and as long as you stay in 16-bit mode, you
shouldn't see any posterization.

Curves is certainly more versatile than Levels, but it doesn't have a
built-in histogram. In 16-bit mode, there's no harm in using one, then the
other. I usually use Levels to get rid of most of the wasted space on both
sides of the histogram, boosting the contrast somewhat. Then, I go into
Curves, and get the precise tonal shape that I want, often with some sort of
contrast-enhancing S-curve.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.