• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: 16-bit Printing
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 16-bit Printing


  • Subject: Re: 16-bit Printing
  • From: Robert Krawitz <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:46:42 -0500

   From: Scott Martin <email@hidden>
   Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:23:58 -0600

   On Nov 19, 2008, at 4:08 PM, Fleisher, Ken wrote:

   > I have not seen any results from one of these printers that can
   > accept a
   > full 16-bits/channel and I’m wondering if those of you who have
   > experience
   > with them, can you describe what you have seen? Do you feel there is
   > any
   > real benefit to printing a full 16-bit image? Can you actually “see” a
   > difference? If so, is it a significant difference?

   Excellent question. The Canon iPF printers have offered high bit depth
   printing for years via their Photoshop printing plug-in. Since Bill
   Atkinson's targets are 16-bit, one can use his targets to profile the
   printer in it's high bit depth mode. For the sake of simplicity, let's
   call these 16-bit, profiles (even though one can make 16 bit profiles
   from 8 bit targets). When I make evaluation prints from 8-bit profiles
   in 8-bit mode and 16-bit profiles in 16-bit mode on these printers I
   can see a difference, but it's really minor. I can even see a
   difference when I profile the 16-bit mode using 8 and 16 bit 1728
   patch targets. A granger rainbow gains smoothness when a high bit
   depth mode is profiled using a high bit depth target. I think it's
   quite unlikely that you would ever see this difference in a real
   photograph.

Gutenprint offers 16 bit input, which you can use with CUPS 1.3,
Cinepaint, or PhotoPrint.

   So I'm tempted to conclude that high bit depth printing translates
   into almost no quality improvements for the common end user.
   Technically there is an improvement but it's not worth bragging about.
   I do, however, suspect that the importance of printer bit depth could
   increase with expanding print gamuts due to new papers and inksets.

I'm curious to get my hands on an Epson 2880.

   Another issue that warrants further examination is the bit depth of
   each printer's on board processing of the incoming data.  Processing a
   full 16 bits on the fly requires a significant amount amount of
   processing power relative to processing 8 or 12 bit data. I've spoken
   with engineers at Epson, HP and Canon about this issue. Contact me
   offlist if you'd like to discuss this further.

All inkjet printers I know of (other than possibly some HP ones) do
all of their processing on the host; it's dithered down to 1 or 2 bits
per channel and sent to the printer.

--
Robert Krawitz                                     <email@hidden>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail email@hidden
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
 _______________________________________________
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

References: 
 >16-bit Printing (From: "Fleisher, Ken" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: 16-bit Printing (From: Scott Martin <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: 16-bit Printing
  • Next by Date: Re: ICC Profile needed
  • Previous by thread: Re: 16-bit Printing
  • Next by thread: Re: 16-bit Printing
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread