Posted by Nick Caddick on February 8, 2008 at 12:46 PM
I run PS Elements and I am now entitled to 50% off the price of PS CS3, all very tempting!
My question is can I "batch" convert my 800+ 8-bit tiff files to 16-bit in CS3 or will I have to re-convert the raw files at 16-bit? and if it is possible to "batch" convert will it degrade my image quality ?
All help appreciated
Posted by Dan Borzynski on February 8, 2008 at 4:23 PM
When you opened the file originally and saved it as 8-bit, you lost some information in the conversion to 8-bit. Converting it back to a 16 bit file will not restore that information, so technically, you'll have to go back to the RAW files.
But will it be worth doing? If you have already processed the files, for color, saturation, shadows and highlights, etc., and are basically satisfied with the end results, I won't bother. If all you have done is converted the file from a RAW file to a tiff file and saved, then it probably would be worth the effort to reconvert those unedited files as you need them.
Using an automation process in PS, you can probably do 800 files moderately quickly.
With regards to your processing question: Simply going from 8 bit to 16 will not affect your image. What happens is that instead of the levels of the red channel going from 0, 1, 2, 3, they will go 0, 256, 512, 768, ... The color that is 1 in 8 bit is the same color as 256 in 16 bit, 2 in 8 bit is 512 in 16 bit, and so on. The extra space will allow some changes in the color channels you couldn't previously do.
If you were to open a file in 16 bit, process, save in 8 bit, open back in 16 bit, process, and do this several times, wierd color artifacts will appear. Roughly speaking, you are changing the information and then in saving it, changing it a bit again but by rounding. Eventually colors that should be different even to your eye will begn to converge to the same color.
Usually, 8 bit vs 16 bit is more of an issue where there are subtle tonal differences that need to be kept, the image needs heavy processing, or a combination of both.
Last, if you have the money to upgrade to CS3, I'd seriously consider it even without worrying about your question. It is not worth peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for two months, but it is nice. CS(n) is not necessary - until last year, every image I had ever sold either as a print or as rights was processed in Elements 3. Having said that, for the amount of shooting I do, I would not willingly go back to Elements, in part due to the automation features.
Posted by Ed Cordes on February 8, 2008 at 10:37 PM
Answer to your question - What Dan said!
However, some additional input - I have had some fun and better results re processing older images with CS3 that i originally processed with E3. I wouldn't suggest doing this to all images, but those "special ones" may turn out better than before.
I can't help you with your technical question, but I can tell you I, too, was tempted! I broke down and upgraded to CS3 and could not be happier! Ps...I bundled it with Lightroom.
Sharon
Posted by Andy Richards on February 23, 2008 at 2:04 PM
Nick: My own feeling is that almost every serious photographer (at least those of us that like to do our own processing) sooner or later makes the jump to PS. Its an awfully expensive jump, and it seems like its mostly overkill (stuff we'll never use) but I haven't ever heard anyone say they regretted it. I was at a John Shaw seminar last weekend and his answer to the question why go to the expense of PS was "because that's where all the cool stuff is."
Discussion
4 repliesMy question is can I "batch" convert my 800+ 8-bit tiff files to 16-bit in CS3 or will I have to re-convert the raw files at 16-bit? and if it is possible to "batch" convert will it degrade my image quality ?
All help appreciated
But will it be worth doing? If you have already processed the files, for color, saturation, shadows and highlights, etc., and are basically satisfied with the end results, I won't bother. If all you have done is converted the file from a RAW file to a tiff file and saved, then it probably would be worth the effort to reconvert those unedited files as you need them.
Using an automation process in PS, you can probably do 800 files moderately quickly.
With regards to your processing question: Simply going from 8 bit to 16 will not affect your image. What happens is that instead of the levels of the red channel going from 0, 1, 2, 3, they will go 0, 256, 512, 768, ... The color that is 1 in 8 bit is the same color as 256 in 16 bit, 2 in 8 bit is 512 in 16 bit, and so on. The extra space will allow some changes in the color channels you couldn't previously do.
If you were to open a file in 16 bit, process, save in 8 bit, open back in 16 bit, process, and do this several times, wierd color artifacts will appear. Roughly speaking, you are changing the information and then in saving it, changing it a bit again but by rounding. Eventually colors that should be different even to your eye will begn to converge to the same color.
Usually, 8 bit vs 16 bit is more of an issue where there are subtle tonal differences that need to be kept, the image needs heavy processing, or a combination of both.
Last, if you have the money to upgrade to CS3, I'd seriously consider it even without worrying about your question. It is not worth peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for two months, but it is nice. CS(n) is not necessary - until last year, every image I had ever sold either as a print or as rights was processed in Elements 3. Having said that, for the amount of shooting I do, I would not willingly go back to Elements, in part due to the automation features.
However, some additional input - I have had some fun and better results re processing older images with CS3 that i originally processed with E3. I wouldn't suggest doing this to all images, but those "special ones" may turn out better than before.
Sharon