RE: 16-bit images...

["Gus J Grubba" <gus@grubba.com>]

You would see a difference if you need to work on the image. If what you
scan is what you print, there will be too little of a difference to be
noticeable. Most of my "print" work is BW using a 16 bit, grayscale RIP.
The more information given to it the better (as it converts the many
gray values into different gray tones on a six-ink printer).

My "day job" is film (the moving variety as opposed to the still one)
and video. In there, you always want to work in 16 bit/channel mode.
Images, especially large ramps, become very "banded" when going through
gamma and/or other corrections.

The easiest test you can do yourself. Just play with a large ramp. By
that I mean something that will print over a long stretch (a blue
mountain sky going from very lit to a deep blue is an example of a real
life ramp). Another is to use an image where you have a large contrast
between a lit area and a shadow area (provided the source contains
information in both extremes). 

I'm not sure you would find something on the web as it would most likely
be an image butchered by jpeg compression.

g

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-epson-inkjet@leben.com [mailto:owner-epson-inkjet@leben.com]
On Behalf Of david schrader
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 7:45 PM
To: epson-inkjet@leben.com
Subject: Re: 16-bit images...

> Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 08:18:17 -0700
> From: "Gus J Grubba" <gus@grubba.com>
>Subject: RE: 16 bit editing...

>In my opinion, serious work can only be performed within 16 bits. It
>amazes me that Photoshop, after all these years is still so restricted
>in this regard.


Thanks for the post.  Just curious: over the course of your testing have
you
ever made side-by-side print comparisons of both an 8-bit scan and a
16-bit
scan of the same image?  It'd be very intriguing to read about such a
comparison (even better to see it; anyone on the list know if such a
visual
comparison exists anywhere on the web?)  I understand the theory behind
the
reason for working in 16-bits and it does seem like the preferred way to
go.
Personally, I haven't explored it because I haven't wanted to deal with
the
increased file sizes... I need to occasionally make big prints and thus
most
of my image files are in the 200 to 300 meg range.  Maybe when I upgrade
my
system :o) ...

Thanks again,

Dave Schrader



-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.