Hi Art,
> ...and that's even concluding that the scanner is really
> capturing the full 16 bit depth, which many do not.
I'm not sure ANY do. Do you know of a scanner that really has a usable 16
bits of data for each color? I know a few (and only a very few from what
I've seen) *claim* 16 bits,
Hi Laurie,
This isn't about minutia, this is about belief systems and religion ;-)
The only real solution to deal with the zealotry would be a carefully
controlled double blind experiment. Otherwise, we are indeed the blind
leading the blind, because simply, we shall see what we expect to see.
Robert Logan wrote:
>
>>For most images, there will be
>>no visible degradation in the image using only 8
>>bits/color. If you haven't tried an experiment, and
>>are only speaking of "theory"
>
>
> Ive noticed it in practice severally. Notably in
> shots with some very variable lighting across
Andreas,
> Austin Franklin wrote:
> >>Its well documented in the 3D community that having
> >>24 bit colour internally in 3D processing engines
> >>can result in banding in certain scenes, and thats
> >>why Nvidia and ATI have developed 32 bit engines,
> >>and more.
> >
> > That's an entirely diff
Austin Franklin wrote:
>>Its well documented in the 3D community that having
>>24 bit colour internally in 3D processing engines
>>can result in banding in certain scenes, and thats
>>why Nvidia and ATI have developed 32 bit engines,
>>and more.
>
> That's an entirely different issue.
I don't thin
Robert,
> Yes - 8 bit does work fine for most images, but if
> you really want to throw an image into some editing,
> then relying on 8 bits is foolhardy if you can get
> more to work with.
BUT...you really don't GET 16 bits. You get 10, 12 or 13, and even if you
*think* you get 14, you really d
On the face of it, this does seem to be another silly debate. In his
responses Austin covered his ass bymaking of point of sayin 16-bit is not
necessary in most color scans as contrasted to all, which means that nay
exception you bring up will be considered by his as an exception and not the
rule.
> of each individual color, true, and it's also 16M
> colors. Also, you're not likely to get only one
> color out of three.
Yes, but the 16M is just that, a mythical
number that never appears in most images,
the range of colours is typically more
far restricted.
> For most images, there will be
Hi Robert,
> Austin Franklin wrote:
> > It really depends on if you are talking color or B&W. For B&W,
> there is no
> > question, you need to use 16 bits for doing all but a minimum
> tonal curve
> > adjustment, but for color, for most applications you won't see any
> > difference using 8 bit da
Austin Franklin wrote:
> It really depends on if you are talking color or B&W. For B&W, there is no
> question, you need to use 16 bits for doing all but a minimum tonal curve
> adjustment, but for color, for most applications you won't see any
> difference using 8 bit data or 16 bit data.
Have t
10 matches
Mail list logo
