Re: 16 bits = 15 bits in Photoshop?
Re: 16 bits = 15 bits in Photoshop?
- Subject: Re: 16 bits = 15 bits in Photoshop?
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:04:11 -0400
I wrote:
> But what I'm slowly gathering is that
> bit depths should not be discussed as absolutes but as "situation" or
> application-specific.
< snip>
> but
> when the transitionning is more subtle, as in Robert's example of a sky,
> then having more bits to discretely map all that smooth transitionning is
> more important.>>
To which Dan replied:
> That's correct. The considerations and the results are the same as in
> determining how much resolution an image needs. Robert's example needs to be
> conservative in that regard. The first example, even when output at the same
> size, can get by with considerably less resolution.
I wish you would have kept the discussion on the grounds of bit depth
strictly, Dan. We can debate at lengths the effects of more or less
resolution in general, without making sweeping generalizations, that is. But
I'd like to see you elaborate on 8 bit vs 16 bit, as I evoked above, in
mapping discreetely the subtle transitionning of those sky tones, especially
given the fact that there isn't much transition to capture to begin with. My
contention is that a 16 bit capture will conserve MORE of that original sky
subtle gradation than an 8 bit capture. To me, that makes intuitive sense
but, I think you want hard facts?
Regards,
Roger Breton | Laval, Canada | email@hidden
http://pages.infinit.net/graxx
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden