RE: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?

[Don Bryant <dsbryant@bellsouth.net>]

Yves,

> > Conclusion:
> >
> > Though I started with random numbers which mean the data is not a real
> > image, I took great care to use numbers that would be representative of
a
> > real world B&W image. Also the curve I use may not be representative of
an
> > actual transformation one would use on a real image but it is actually
an
> > inverse gamma transformation and this type of transform is used
practically
> > all the time in color managed environment. I think we can say that both
the
> > data and the curve are representative of actual editing that could be
done
> > on real world images though this particular data set is similar to a B&W
> > image and it may not be the same with a color image.
> >
> > I think we can safely say that this particular editing simulation shows
that
> > we would benefit from working in 16 bit mode.
> >
> > But I remind you that other types of editing may or may not allow us to
come
> > to the same conclusion.

If I understand your post correctly you didn't actually edit an image in any
type of image editing software. That being the case how can we draw any
conclusions relative to real world image editing based on your simulation?

Or to put it another way, how do you know what an image editing program does
to real image data and thus how can you arrive at that conclusion with any
reliability?

I think the most useful way to approach this problem is to use real data in
real software and examine the results, either visually or numerically.

Don Bryant