Save as 8 bit or 16 bit??

What are you guys doing?

Is it worth the extra space saving as 16 bit over 8 bit?

Can printers actually take advantage of the 16 bit files?

Thanks
Kevin

Kevin, there probably isn't a cut-n-dry answer, but I would say this: You want to keep your images in 16-bit if at all possible, because if you have to do some heavier editing (dodging/burning, etc) you'll want the extra data latitude. Also, printers are starting to come out that handle 16-bit (so I've read), but I think you have to be on Photoshop CS4 to take advantage of that, but don't quote me on that one. If you are doing images strictly for web and just doing standard editing (Levels, Saturation, etc), 16 bit doesn't add much. BUT, hard drive space is cheaper than ever, so why not have the info there, right? You can always knock it down to 8 bit when needed (Save for Web in Photoshop does that automatically).

Anyway, just 5 cents worth of info. Maye someone can shed more light on the 16-bit printing part.

I'd say that you should save your working file in 16 bit then save the file you are going to print or send to a publisher in whatever format they want. I know that 16 bit takes more space and also more memory to process but RAM and hard disks are relatively inexpensive anymore and with a new, fast processor running 64 bit CS4 you can compensate--Larry

There isn't a printer out there that can render 16 bit images that look any different than an 8 bit image. It just doesn't make a 'bit' of difference (..ouch!!).
I save my Master files in 16 bit mode, unsharpened and in Adobe RGB color space, then edit a duplicate further for print and web use.
Note that I save only the best images for Master files, so the amount of space used isn't intolerable. With the price of high data storage external hard drives so low these days, the extra data involved with 16 bit images is nearly a moot point anyway.

I would always save my images at the highest quality possible. Maybe I am spitting in the wind, but I do believe I see a difference with my Pixma Pro 9500 printer printing 16 bit.

Besides, if you save at a lower quality you are out of luck when the technology improves. As John said, memory is cheap these days - At least compared to other things photographic!!

Thanks Guys.

I agree memory/storage is relatively cheap these days, but with the amount of photos I take and process it still gets pretty overwhelming. I was really just curious if you can actually see a difference in a file saved at 8 bit or 16 bit...

I save all my original camera raw files, so if for some reason I had to go back and work in 16 bit I could just go back to the original image..

...I do believe I see a difference with my Pixma Pro 9500 printer printing 16 bit.

Ed - That printer (and all of them, really) only works on 8-bit data. So any difference you're seeing is probably due to the different data preparation that might exist between you creating 8-bit data, and the printer driver creating 8-bit data from your 16-bit file. That's the only explanation I can think of, but I'm not sure if that would be it. (It could all be in your head, too, of course... )