I have several questions below my observations here. Thank you!
I want to open a .AWR (Sony A7R2) as a 32-bit image. When I import the .ARW raw file into Photoshop through Adobe Bridge or Adobe Lightroom Classic, and choose the "Open in Photoshop as a Smart Object" option, and have the export settings in Adobe Bridge or Adobe Lightroom Classic as 16/bit (because there is currently no 32-bit option... yet?) even though the image file name in Photoshop will be something like (DSC00001, RGB/16*)* AND the Photoshop bottom left data bar will give me the data reflecting a 16 bit rasterized image (241.3M)...
When I immediately save the Raw "Smart Object Layer" (WITHOUT rasterizing - single layer) as a TIFF, then I check its actual data size on my computer, it is around 684.33 MB (No compression Tiff).
Also, if I import the .ARW file into Photoshop through Adobe Bridge or Lightroom Classic, choosing the "Open in Photoshop as a Smart Object" option, BUT I immediately change the Photoshop working space to 32-BIT (Image>/Mode>/32-bit) and do not rasterize... immediately the the Photoshop bottom left data bar seems to give me a data reading reflecting a 32-bit image. It DOUBLES from the 241.3M (in 16 bit) now to 482.7M (in 32-bit).
If I immediately SAVE the file as 32-bit TIFF (WITHOUT rasterizing - No Compression - 32-bit float option) its saved file size is 1023.41MB.
If I immediately save the file as a 32 bit TIFF (Flattened/Rasterized) its saved file size is 941.84MB
If I immediately save the file as a 32 bit PSB (WITHOUT rasterizing) its saved file size is 644.73GB.
If I immediately save the file as a 32 bit PSB ( Flattened/Rasterized) its saved file size is 563.16MB
The above data amounts seem to potentially partially support the following idea then below questions:
When a raw image is adjusted in Adobe Bridge or Adobe Lightroom Classic (Camera Raw Parametric Edits, with the virtual results being represented as a virtual Preview Image), then the file is imported into Photoshop as a “Smart Object”, then, the ONLY further adjustments done to the file are done by clicking into the “Smart Object” (with actual Camera Raw opening - further adjustments being made there - and then in Camera Raw, “OK” is clicked on and as the preview updates it says “preparing smart object” and then the new adjustments show on the virtual preview image...
Are these adjustments lossless?
Is the computation being done in Camera Raw?
Is the computation being done in Camera Raw 32-bit float point?
Is it done, at a higher bit depth, with more integrity based on, or with access to the original raw data, as opposed to (or different than) typical rasterized 16-bit pixel adjustments?
If an .ARW raw file is brought into Photoshop as a “Smart Object” layer, then Photoshop’s working space is immediately changed (Step 2) to the 32-bit working space, and then ALL of the additional adjustments to the image are done only to the original raw “Smart Object” layer, and some additional copies of the raw “Smart Object” layer (by duplicating - “New Smart Object Via a Copy”) and then these layers are blended together using Photoshop masks, created while in the 32-bit space (32-bit masks?) and the supposedly 32-bit brush (black/white - concealing/revealing)…
Do we then essentially have what could be called or considered lossless 32-bit Raw Layers in Photoshop?
If the parametric editing/computation done in Camera Raw is NOT higher bit depth, higher integrity, less degrading, lossless… Is it basically the SAME thing as adjustments done to a rasterized file, via “adjustment layers” and “smart object” layers applied to a 16-bit image, when flattened?
If only parametric editing is done via Camera Raw, and raw “Smart Object Layers” with no adjustments made to rasterized pixel data… (especially considering working in Photoshop’s 32-bit space) once the image is eventually flattened, will we now have a substantially more robust data file? Especially if a lot of adjustments have been made?
Lastly, if a raw image file follows the above workflow, in the 32-bit working space, with a variety of only raw “smart object layers” (new smart object via a copy) and only raw smart object parametric editing is used by clicking into actual Camera Raw for each smart object layer (except for the masking). Then the image is finally rasterized in Photoshop’s 32-bit space. Then maybe just a few minor final adjustments are made to the 32-bit rasterized file, via Levels, or Curves, or Hue/Saturation… and lastly the file is finally converted into the 16-bit space (usually through the HDR dialogue window - choosing the “Exposure Gamma” option) do we now have a potentially unusually ROBUST 16-bit data file, potentially lacking some, a lot, or or nearly all of the typical degrading we can see when a person uses a lot of Photoshop 16-bit adjustments?
*Please keep in mind I’m talking about making HUGE prints here and files with LOTS of adjustments.