raw 16bit vs 8bit + work flow check

[darb]

hi all

when i shoot raw, i use a series of automated actions which open the NEF, push standard Adobe Camera RAW conversion (all settings left as "as the shot"), apply a USM mask, and a bit of saturation increase, before changing from 16bit to 8bit, and saving as a PSD.

WHat is the difference / benefit of the 16 bit? Obviously once i go jpeg (the next step) then 8 bit is compulsory but during this PP stage, am i benefitial to stay 16 bit UNTIL i get to my jpeg stage?

Once I've made a coffee and let CS auto convert and sharpen all my NEF's into PSD's, i then open any that i want to make specific changes to, and save back to the PSD as many times as I like.

Then when ive finished my "per image" modifications, i run another batch which converts the PSD's into JPEG's (just below max compression.)

Basically I work this way to automate it so i dont have to confuse my "global PP to all images" time vs my "per image PP'ing". I usually use the same USM mask and saturation +10 so ive included them in the automated parts.

Also means that if im lazy, i can still shoot RAW, have nice saturated and sharp images, converted cleanly to JPG, in one mouse click.

I've also done it for JPG, so that even if i shoot jpeg, i can convert straight to PSD, run a sharpening batch and have multiple saves to the PSD without 1) worrying about artifacts forming, and 2) having to wait around while mundane stuff like USM is applied.

JPEG's go off onto the net, and the PSD's are kept as negatives (or nef, but usuaully neither unless its an important shot, not that many of mine are !)

A screen shot of my rough and nasty photoshop buttons ... but hey I often never have to touch my keyboard during PP'ing

http://darb.net/anonymous/post_process_ ... ion?full=1

[sirhc55]

I treat every photo individually simply because every photo is individual. To my mind set automation is like Harvey Norman photo printing, whilst individualisation is the work of specialised photo studios.

[darb]

how profound

I 99% of the time use the same USM mask across my images, but ive also got actions that do no modifications except converting from NEF into something useable in CS such as the PSD. As it stands I generally include saturation +10 and my favourite USM most of the time because i find im always doing it anyway. Naturally if results arent as I want I can go back to the NEF and manually do the USM and saturation aswell as the normal manual steps I do (such as cropping, levels, curves, when necessary.) and of course for any real special shots I pay extra attention.

I also lead a busy life (dont we all) and shoot a lot of things, more often than not just "happy snaps" but i like to ensure each photo is as good as it can be, without missing out on more by being stuck manually PP'ing each shot. (each shot gets vetted anyway, but most of the time im happy with the results from my automation ... wipe the memory card, and off to the next thing!). If nothing else, i dont have to sit around and wait for the NEF to PSD conversion, nor the PSD to JPEG conversion.

so back to my question about the 8 or 16bit, aswell as the way ive done the workflow (minus any disgruntlement about my own decision to include USM as an automated step.)

For me so far its shaven chunks of time off and given me great results, as i know precisely waht im after ... except dont firmly understand 8 vs 16bit, nor whether using PSD as my negative has any implication or can be done better.

[AlistairF]

A good explaination here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/bit-depth.shtml

Alistair

[Aussie Dave]

I also treat each image unto itself. Typically, I open Nikon View, transfer NEFs from CF card to PC (via card reader) then view the NEFs to find the clearest shots, usually discarding the OOF or poor shots.
From here, I jump into Nikon Capture and open each of the NEFs I'm happy with, correct any WB or EC as required then import image into PSCS. From PSCS I then adjust levels, saturation, noise, shadow/highlights, resize, USM and/or edge sharpen etc.. (as required) then save according to how I will be using the pic....web or print.

Can't say I worry too much about 8 or 16bit.

It is interesting to read the workflows of others.....

[W00DY]

I also treat each image unto itself. Typically, I open Nikon View, transfer NEFs from CF card to PC (via card reader) then view the NEFs to find the clearest shots, usually discarding the OOF or poor shots.
From here, I jump into Nikon Capture and open each of the NEFs I'm happy with, correct any WB or EC as required then import image into PSCS. From PSCS I then adjust levels, saturation, noise, shadow/highlights, resize, USM and/or edge sharpen etc.. (as required) then save according to how I will be using the pic....web or print.

Can't say I worry too much about 8 or 16bit.

It is interesting to read the workflows of others.....

Is there any benefit of adjusting levels, saturation, USm in PS rather than in NC? Or is just that you are used to PS?

I tend to do most of my PP in NC and then only really use PS to add a border and save to JPEG. This is probably becouse I only know a little about PS though.

W00DY

[sirhc55]

I believe that if a person has been involved in PS for a long time they tend to do their workflow in this program. The newer digital converts would probably use NC more because of the - ”Nikon Flow” - concept.

Both programs are very good although I find PS to be faster than NC unless of course you have a Pentium 5000 with a Terabyte chip

[sheepie]

...unless of course you have a Pentium 5000 with a Terabyte chip

Which, I am sure Birddog will be able to source if you are interested!




My workflow currently requires me to go into each pic I want to edit individually, as I see each in a different way. I am trying to get my act together in a lot of respects though, as I never seem to get to every pic I want to edit!
I intend to set something similar to this up:
Select a group of pics to have the same NEF conversion as each other, run this and then have the likes of sharpening applied, etc. (on a new layer). Then save as PSD in a new directory, convert to 8-bit RGB, put a border on, then save again as JPG to another directory ready for upload to Web. Any I want to do extra with, I will still do this manually.
I believe leaving them in 16-bit mode until ready to save for Web supposedly gives better reporduction of colour hues - at worst, it slows up the computer a little and means for bigger file sizes!

I'm also trying to get my act together on using Photools Imatch for catalogs.

[Link]

Darb,

From what I've read, going 16 bits is really a plus only if you intend to do some serious PP. If you leave the image in 8 bits, the histogram 'breaks up' more easily when you PP and that basically means you're losing image quality. That's the theory...

Link.

[darb]

thanks for the useful replies guys ... it hink ill leave my NEF and PSD's as 16 bit and only bother with 8bit when i go jpeg, ive had replies in other forums to say that the 16bit will allow more fine tuning. 16 bit of course what the NEF is in already.

As for the CS vs NC question ... just what im used to I suppose, and its not always Nikon NEF's either, plus i like CS *shrug*, there are many many CS tools i use, so i rather just do the whole lot in CS. (plus i find the nikon software to be bloated even on this PC it manages to eat a gig or two of RAM!)

I use nikon viewer as my NEF "browser" when deciding which to delete / keep etc after a shoot.

[Aussie Dave]

Hi Woody
not sure if there is any benefit doing PP in PS instead of NC. I actually used to always use Paint Shop Pro (which is the cheaper knock-off of Photoshop), however as PS is industry standard, almost everything is made compatible with it.

I think whatever works for the individual is the best. As long as the end result is a good photo, it doesn't matter if you use PS, NC or Microsoft Paint.

[W00DY]

Good to know.

I thought maybe PS sharpens images better or something like that.

Cheers,

W00DY