Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 22, 2008, 11:54 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Hi Guys and Gals

I've been shooting RAW consistently for over 18months and never really thought too much about my work flow as all my pics usually end up on-line and occassionally printed out. Now that things are getting a wee bit serious- pic's wise I'm wondering whether I need to change my RAW workflow or not, esp if the files are going to be printed by a magazine?

Currently - shoot in RAW and use ACR 4.4/CS3 to convert the files into 8bit sRGB Jpegs (100% quality). In CS3 a wee bit of USM and convert to B&W if needed.

So what I'd like to know is:

1. Colour space - sRGB or Adobe RGB ? I know this has been gone over like theres no tomorrow and I'm more than happy with sRGB but as I mentioned before the studio recommended working in AdobeRGB esp if for printed work. If I'm providing images for a magazine is ARGB the way to go ?
2. 8 or 16bit/channel ?
3. Final file format - jpeg or Tiff ? What compression if any to the Tiff files ?

I've done a test with 16 bit files both Adobe/sRGb saved as tif's but rather than recreate the wheel I thought I'd ask your opinions on which way to go.

Cheers

Harj



HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 22, 2008, 12:08 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,554
Default

........you've at last posted an inquiry set that I have no real response to because the questions are just a bit above my head right now.

BUT, I am happy with jpg @ 8-bit in the sRGB space realm.

How's that.... I did recently do some RAW to tiff and got so surprised at the resulting file sizes that I make sure to just do .jpg since I have no idea of why .tif would or could be a better end file for my usage.

I am going to mark this thread and hopefully see a learning experience from it.

Thanks for an opportunity
_________
boBBrennan
boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2008, 12:16 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Hi Bob

I'm pretty happy with the 8bit SRGB jpegs but I know from havign worked in various media companies they can be pretty finiky with the type of files they recieve. What I dont; really want is to duplicate my work - I'm spending too much time in working on RAW files than I really like and the thought of having to redo various pics isn't appealing!

Cheers

Harj

:? :O


HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2008, 5:12 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,901
Default

Hi Harj: Most Commercial printers are going to convert to CMYK to prepare the printing plates. I vote for raw and sRGB. But it's hard to find agreement even among the pros.

:?

Read all the following articles and you may reach a conclusion. It may be a good idea to inquire of some of the commercial publishers therein London and see if they will disclose their requirements.

http://www.earthboundlight.com/photo...gb-debate.html

http://www.digitalimagecafe.com/articles/colorSpace/

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm

http://www.smugmug.com/help/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-1998


Good luck

Steven R.

Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2008, 11:37 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Mikefellh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,707
Default

If I was using Oly's (or another company's) RAW converter program and was going to load and continue editing or printing the image in another editing program (like Photoshop) I'd save in TIFF-16bit.

If I was doing the conversion within Photoshop and going to continue editing the image I'd save it in the program's proprietary format (like PSD for Photoshop, CPT for Corel PhotoPaint) which allows the saving of layers.

If I was wanting to put it on the internet I'd EXPORT to JPEG (or GIF) and not very high quality (1024x768 or smaller, PPI is meaningless)...of course I'd still keep my original sized PSD/CPT (or equivalent) file format for myself.

Mikefellh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2008, 4:25 AM   #6
OCD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 101
Default

I agree with Mikefellh that saving the image after RAW conversion in ACR as a PSD is theideal overall option. It gives much more leeway to continue editing the image and changing colour space, size,etc for each application, especially if you edit with layers.

If your outlets for the image are known, and you can do enough editing to create what you feel will be the final end print I would save as a 16 bit TIFF (no compression) in Adobe RGB and use that as the basis for further resizing, changing colour space etc. I would never save a 'master' copy of an image as an 8 bit file, nor would I save it as an sRGB file. In both cases you are potentially throwing the baby out with the bathwater (image information), although of course you still have your ORF to fall back on and start again.
OCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2008, 5:04 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
gwillys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 247
Default

i agree. for print-Adobe RGB, 16 bit TIFF. i use qimagewith my trusty old kodak 1400.

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/
gwillys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2008, 6:03 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

pgmCoder wrote:
Quote:
I make sure to just do .jpg since I have no idea of why .tif would or could be a better end file.
Hi, Bob

TIFF is not a compressed format; JPEG is compressed.To compress the file size, the jpeg conversion throws out a lot of the information in the file. For "permanent" files you don't want to save in a compressed format because you're losing a lot of the information in the file.

Worse, unless you are using CS3, every time you play with the image and re-save the jpeg file, it is compressed again so you lose more information. For PShop CS3 Adobe fixed that so it doesn't re-compress the file but earlier versions of PShop, as well as other image editing applications,do.

There is asimilar situation in digital audio files. A WAV audio file is not compressed, but mp3 files are. I do a lot of audio file archiving and I archive them as WAV files, but if I need to distribute them over the Internet I convert them to mp3s so the file size is smaller. But with good audio equipment I can hear the difference.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2008, 10:27 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Thanks for all the replies. I've been saving most files that needed more than a simple USM as PSD's but the problem that i can see is storage - a 16bit PSD with just 3 layers ends up taking 154MB of disk space and the tiff without any layers or compression is at 54MB. Compare this to the 8bit jpegs from the E3 which max out at 11-12MB. Its kind of frightening just thinking about having a terabyte or more of storage at home and woking out how to back it all up!

I'm going to start using 16bit Tiff files - not sure on whether to go with ARGB or stay with sRGB just yet, although Adrian who runs teh studio insists that ARGB is the way to go. I'll get some images printed off and see how they compare.

Cheers

Harj

:O :?
HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2008, 3:17 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
Its kind of frightening just thinking about having a terabyte or more of storage at home and woking out how to back it all up!
Hi Harj,

Actually in these times a terabyte of storage isn't that big a deal (smile). A good place to look is:

http://www.simpletech.com/

I say this because my friends who are Mac users, use the SimpleTechdrives that have a firewire connection as well as USB2, and the prices are reasonable if you shop around. As a Windoze user I have a pair of Simpletech 1TB drives (one main, one backup) that haveUSB2/eSATA connection options, and were around $300USD apiece. That's amazing for a terabyte of storage, which was a dream even a couple of years ago.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:34 AM.