> >> Well, if you choose your black and white points in such a way to clip
> >> away some of the histogram (you might want to do that to have stronger
> >> colours and/or a more vibrant image) you cannot go back without losses.
> >That's obvious, but not very realistic. If you plan to do your
> >corrections in Photoshop, it's obvious that you will *NOT* clip anything
> >while opening the RAW file. Choosing black and white points will *ALSO*
> >be done in Photoshop in that case.
> It is possible to do all optimisations at the RAW stage - white balance,
> white and black points, saturation, sharpness, contrast, noise and CA
> reduction etc. That's the beauty of RAW - further processing after the
> RAW converter stage is not necessary.
I know that, and that's the way I work myself. But that's not what the
discussion is about, though. The discussion is about that is not BETTER
to do all the optimisations at the RAW stage, it's a matter of choice.
If you open the file in 16 bits in Photoshop, you *CAN* do it there if
you want. After all, Photoshop has more uptions than the RAW opener has.
It's up to you to use what you like best.
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/