Re: filmscanners: 24bit - 48bit dilemma & Work flow suggestions

[John Matturri <jmatturr@earthlink.net>]

I find it a good idea to scan into a 48 bit file, spot with the cloning tool,
crop any border, and then archive. That doesn't commit to any approach to the
image but means that you never have to do the drudgery of spotting again.

In important cases I often save all the changes in order (not the stages of the
files themselves but using the save-levels, save-curve (etc.) commands, along
with any associated selections), doing as much as possible in 48 bit, then
converting to 24 bit for any local adjustments and saving. This makes it
possible to go back to any point and make adjustments and then to proceed with
the following commands, but keeps the total disk space used for an image not
much bigger than the initial and final image.

Of course if scanners improve greatly I'll want to rescan the important images
anyway despite the archived files. . .

John M.


> Ramesh Kumar_C wrote:
>
> >
> > This is about 24bits & 48 bits:
> >
> > Scanner can deliver 36 bits; So I am in a dilemma whether to store the
> > scanner output in 48bit TIFF file or 24bit TIFF file.
> > I have thought of following 2 methods, let me know which of the following
> > will be good.
> > a) Store 36BIT Scanner output  in 24 bit TIFF file. Edit this 24bit TIFF
> > file in 8-bit channel in PS. This is easy solution.
> > b) Store 36BIT Scanner output  in 48 bit TIFF file. Edit this 48bit TIFF
> > file in 16-bit channel in PS. Then convert 48bit TIFF file to 24 bits.
> >