... or should I just make a duplicate JPEG to work with and backup what Iíve downloaded ( I also burn to disc as well / no compression)
Makes sense for me.
/> Duplicate the image in Photoshop
/> Change the copy to 16 bit/ch for further editing.
/> Careful noise reduction and re-sharpening might be among the first to do.
/> Brightness, Contrast, Saturation, etc... may follow. Working with Actions saves a lot of time.
/> If you have adjustment layers it can make sense to save a psd master, but if youíre somewhat sure that you like the results, merge the layers, goto 8 bit again and save as high quality JPEG.
/> So everything stays with just two nice, small files: the original JPEG and the edited version. For minor belated changes, the edited version might be good enough and double JPG saving wonít tear the pixel apart (at least not with regard to final print). For a major rework, start with the original again.
Raw of course has itís advantages, no doubt about this, but IF you strive for ACR calibration you should better know what you are doing. Popular scripts i.e. the Fors script are conceptually flawed which makes it a gambling with colors. As simple as that. We could discuss down to the level of sensorsí spectral response if needed.
Also, as far as JPEG quality is concerned I would not listen to people who bought their last camera years ago. Hereís a more balanced view, very much in line with my measurements, particularly referring to Canon's digic III processor:
>> I usually only shoot raw, but a half hour spent with the latest version of Canon's DPP software when I first got the camera showed me that I was not going to be happy working with DPP. Image quality from DPP isn't the issue. It's fine. Indeed it may be as good as it gets. But the workflow is primitive compared to Camera Raw, Lightroom or Capture One. So, I decided to shoot combined raw + Fine Large JPG, just in case.Interestingly, though I left the in-camera JPGs at the default settings I found that they produced highly usable files. Tonal rendition, saturation and sharpening were all pretty much dead on and very close to what I could produce with DPP unless the image was technically problematic.
I was fortunate to have a pre-release of one of my preferred raw processing programs (coming soon) that has support for the 40D. I used these to process my raw files. <<
Michael Reichmann on the 40Dhttp://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...D-handson.shtml
& best regards, Peter