About the RAW issue -- aren't you going to explain why you used the
term RAW repeatedly when you wrote Adobe's technical paper (and an
embarrassing number of other items) but criticise other people when
they follow your example?
On 4 Nov 2009, at 14:06, Andrew Rodney wrote:
It is for most of us!
Who's "us" -- people like me who actually have to convert images
professionally? Or people like you who talk about converting images
professionally?
The point of my original post -- the bit that you snipped -- was
that this "conversion" is problematic and that you can achieve much
more impressive results by doing this outside of Photoshop.
Using ICC profiles was in your first (and several other posts). Then
you decide later you’ll define the conversion with a device link,
then you decide you’ll not also try the device link in Photoshop.
Enough of the theory, let's take a look at a practical example.
Here's an image in ProPhoto RGB. It's a tough one because even my wide
gamut display is struggling to show the detail in those saturated
colours:
That's disappointing because the detail that was there has now gone
completely! I thought you said that this was easy? Did you forget to
tell me that RGB to RGB conversions in Photoshop mean that all out of
gamut stuff just gets clipped away?
I know, let's use a device link to see if we can get a bit more of
that image into sRGB:
