Re: 8 verses 16 bit

[rafeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

On 2 Mar 2002 at 23:34, byard pidgeon wrote:

> Very informative for a rant...I think the most likely reason Adobe doesn't
> change Photoshop for complete higher bit capabilities is because PS is
> mostly used to create and prep images for use in CMYK offset printing, in
> which the extra bit depth wouldn't be useful, as the gamut is limited...I
> think to less than the full spectrum provided even by 8 bit color.
> Same with video...essentially lo-fi color.


Color bit-depth and gamut aren't the same thing.

Gamut will be a function of the selected color 
space used in PS -- not to mention the input 
and output devices used to capture, then print 
the image.  If you're using PS4 or any non-
color-managed app, then gamut will be ruled 
entirely by the input and output devices.

One fallacy of "color management" is that it 
attempts to reconcile devices with different 
gamuts.  Let's assume, for a moment, that 
your scanner and printer have a wider gamut, 
even in just one color range, than your monitor.  
Just think about the implications of that...

If anyone thinks that 16-bit color will enable 
their Epson to print a shocking pink or a 
deep violet, they're going to be rudely 
surprised.

There are folks that sell PS plugins that in 
effect give you 16-bit versions of some of the 
filters and tools that Adobe never bothered to 
"port."


rafe b.
aka terrapin

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