Digital BW, The Print

>
> When I process in Camera Raw I skip any curves adjustments assuming
> that I am better off using the curves function in PS.  However, after
> some reading, I wonder if using curves during processing of the raw
> image will provide access to information that might be lost after
> conversion to the PSD or TIFF format.  That is, curves in raw might
> provide a function comparable to exposure -- an adjustment that allows
> taking full advantage of the "digital negative."  Is there any basis
> to that argument or am I just as well off skipping curves in raw and
> using a PS layer instead after conversion?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve
>

On Sep 18, 2008, at 4:31 PM, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:

> yes, there's a lot to be said for that argument. But like many things
> it will be hard to prove a visible real difference except on an image
> by image basis. In fact you may never see a difference, but why not
> always take the highest possible quality route? Every little things
> may make the difference. This assumes you are processing out into 16
> bit for your Photoshop work of course.
> I'd do everything global you can in RAW, and use Photoshop for the
> local work, and anything else RAW doesn't offer.
>
> Tyler
> http://www.custom-digital.com/
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Kobrin"
> <kobrins@...> wrote:
>>
>> When I process in Camera Raw I skip any curves adjustments assuming
>> that I am better off using the curves function in PS.  However, after
>> some reading, I wonder if using curves during processing of the raw
>> image will provide access to information that might be lost after
>> conversion to the PSD or TIFF format.  That is, curves in raw might
>> provide a function comparable to exposure -- an adjustment that  
>> allows
>> taking full advantage of the "digital negative."  Is there any basis
>> to that argument or am I just as well off skipping curves in raw and
>> using a PS layer instead after conversion?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Steve
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> 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 “OWNE 
> R” 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, DA 
> MAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE L 
> OSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW,  
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH D 
> AMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIG 
> ITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTER 
> ATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF  
> ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) AN 
> Y OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve F
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 8:05 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Curves in raw vs. PS

 


Steve,

I agree with Tyler. I also do ALL global color and tone adjustments in
ACR before taking the image into PS (as 16 bit). So besides the basic
panel's "exposure" settings for gross addjustment I use he curves panel
for fine tuning contrast/tone adjustments. (Their affects are addative.)
I use White Balance and HSL to implement functions that I used to do
globally in PS with Curves, on the color channels, Hue/Saturation and
Slective color adjustment layers. Another ACR tool must folks don't
think about is the split tone panel to tweak the colors in highlights
and shadows.

Also look into bringing the image into PS from ACR as a smart object.
This will allow you to go bask and tweet the image in ACR even after
adding local adjustment layers. Adds a lot of flexibility.

BTW, Adobe has announced that they are going to announce CS4 before the
end of Sept. Assuming ACR gets the ability to do local/tageted
adjustments, like was just introduced into their Lightroom2, we will
have even more tools at our disposal.

These are truly exciting time to be a digital photographer (assuming you
embrace the rate of change in tool at our disposal.)

Steve Fredrick





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

>
> <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
>