Re: 8 bit vs. more bits
Re: 8 bit vs. more bits
- Subject: Re: 8 bit vs. more bits
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:55:49 -0700
In a message dated Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:54:49, Roger Breton wrote:
> It seems to me from reading all the arguments presented by everyone, that it
> is moot to try to establish 8 bit or 16 bit as absolutes.
Hi, Roger.
Excellent point. Some of us (photographers, in particular) find themselves
working with images and in situations in which 16 bits make much more sense
than 8 bits. Others find themselves quite working in 8 bits. And both are
valid positions for their own intended use.
But the fact still remains that THERE ARE situations in which 16 bits offers
definite advantages over 8 bits (multiple-use images, high-end quality
printing, LVT, images that need extensive editing, etc.).
To say that 16 bits NEVER offers an advantage is just as nonsensical as
saying that it ALWAYS offers an advantage.
And to say that there are two "camps" is to present the issue in the wrong
oversimplifying light. It gives it a Geraldo-like, chair-throwing feel that
it shouldn't have. There are many situations in which it makes not a bit of
difference whether one works in 8 or 16 bits, and that is a fact too.
Let's all keep an open mind, and also let's not fool ourselves either into
accepting easy one-size-fits-all solutions.
--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
_______________________________________________
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