U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?

Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?

Hi  Ryuji,

I agree.... I always convert to 16 bit if I am stuck with an 8 bit file.  If the original file is in color, you can make quite a bit of gain.

The Hasselblad software, camera & scanner are supposed to work in true 16 bit.

Many prosumer cameras are 12 bit or 14 bit.

I would agree, however, that 15 bit gives you a lot of head-room.

Best Wishes,
Mark Nelson

Precision Digital Negatives - The System
PDNPrint Forum at Yahoo Groups

In a message dated 12/16/07 5:47:50 PM, rs@silvergrain.org writes:

From: Ender100@aol.com
Subject: Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:24:32 -0500 (EST)

> I might add though that Photoshop is actually a 15 bit
> program.  If you work with Camera Raw or Scans where the
> software does do true 16 bit, best do as much of the
> adjustments that you can there.

I do not know of a camera or scanner that uses 16-bit range
meaningfully. I also do not think the marginal benefit from 15
to 16 bit is much much much smaller than that from 8 to 9 bits.

I edit images in 16 bit mode even if the original file is 8
bit. This is because extra resolution is useful when resizing,
blurring, sharpening, and applying other operations to an
image. In particular, if the original image is significantly
larger than the final image size, it is often useful.

Ryuji Suzuki
"Listen to your own voice. Don't listen to someone else's. To me the
way to live is to always move forward - to keep searching for whatever
it is that interests you." (Neil Young)

See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)