Thus far I have not decided on my final workflow.
Sometimes I go the route of raw-->jpeg instead of raw-->tiffs (practicality vs quality) but pending finality my usual (tentative) workflow is:
- Copy raw files off card onto drive.
- Sort, Delete and Rename / Catalogue image files using Nikonview.
- Open selected raw files from Nikonview into NC.
- Process raw in NC for WB and USM. CA if needed. Save in TIFFs.
- Post processing in PSCS2.
In its latest iteration, I found PSCS2 now essential to any digital darkroom. Many of my photos taken under the huge dynamic range condition of the Singapore sun would not have made it, if not for the Shadow/Highlight adjustment facility provided by PSCS2. See examples.
This is the tentative conclusion reached after using the latest iteration on my recent photos. Didn't have time to reach the manual yet, as usual :D
NC is indispensable for WB adjustments and initial sharpening. WB adjustments under NC is so straight forward and easy that there is simply no other substitute software for me to adjust WB.
JPEGS vs TIFFs
Although tiff is supposed to give better results in pp due to its 16-bit mode (more bits ==> more info), I am unable to see any visible difference between JPEG and TIFF images on the screen after post-processing. For practical reasons I will probably go the route of raw-->jpegs.
Would tiff-processed files show a difference on prints? Dunno.
I have not gone into prints yet, preferring to wait for the final verdict on the Epson 4800 -- especially whether it is prone to nozzle clogging that afflicts EPSON printers. Pete Walsh in his excellent blog mentioned he has had no issue with clogging so far.
Now, if clogging is an issue, I would need to ensure I have sufficient stock of worthwhile photos to print, so that I could keep the 4800 busy printing at least once every 4~5 days (or longest interval ~ 1 week, I was told) to keep the inkflow line free of clots.
Addendum: Wait a minute! What was I thinking? Since the NEF is only a 12-bit image file, what is the point of using 16-bit tiff as storage format in the workflow? Or am I missing something? Think I will stick to jpeg henceforth.
Sometimes I go the route of raw-->jpeg instead of raw-->tiffs (practicality vs quality) but pending finality my usual (tentative) workflow is:
- Copy raw files off card onto drive.
- Sort, Delete and Rename / Catalogue image files using Nikonview.
- Open selected raw files from Nikonview into NC.
- Process raw in NC for WB and USM. CA if needed. Save in TIFFs.
- Post processing in PSCS2.
In its latest iteration, I found PSCS2 now essential to any digital darkroom. Many of my photos taken under the huge dynamic range condition of the Singapore sun would not have made it, if not for the Shadow/Highlight adjustment facility provided by PSCS2. See examples.
This is the tentative conclusion reached after using the latest iteration on my recent photos. Didn't have time to reach the manual yet, as usual :D
NC is indispensable for WB adjustments and initial sharpening. WB adjustments under NC is so straight forward and easy that there is simply no other substitute software for me to adjust WB.
JPEGS vs TIFFs
Although tiff is supposed to give better results in pp due to its 16-bit mode (more bits ==> more info), I am unable to see any visible difference between JPEG and TIFF images on the screen after post-processing. For practical reasons I will probably go the route of raw-->jpegs.
Would tiff-processed files show a difference on prints? Dunno.
I have not gone into prints yet, preferring to wait for the final verdict on the Epson 4800 -- especially whether it is prone to nozzle clogging that afflicts EPSON printers. Pete Walsh in his excellent blog mentioned he has had no issue with clogging so far.
Now, if clogging is an issue, I would need to ensure I have sufficient stock of worthwhile photos to print, so that I could keep the 4800 busy printing at least once every 4~5 days (or longest interval ~ 1 week, I was told) to keep the inkflow line free of clots.
Addendum: Wait a minute! What was I thinking? Since the NEF is only a 12-bit image file, what is the point of using 16-bit tiff as storage format in the workflow? Or am I missing something? Think I will stick to jpeg henceforth.