Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?

To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?
From: Ryuji Suzuki <rs@silvergrain.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:48:55 -0500 (EST)
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
In-reply-to: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0712181655100.14469@panix1.panix.com>
List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
References: <c2d.251f6d7a.34996d2a@aol.com><Pine.NEB.4.64.0712181655100.14469@panix1.panix.com>
Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
Subject: Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:09:04 -0500 (EST)

> (And just for the record, my gums are 16 bit. Certified.)

And your eyes can only discern about 7 bits worth of them.

Ok maybe 8 bits worth of it if the print is viewed in close to
ideal viewing condition.

--
Ryuji Suzuki
"People seldom do what they believe in.  They do what is convenient,
then repent." (Bob Dylan, Brownsville Girl, 1986)

References:
- Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?
  - From: Ender100@aol.com
- Re: OT: 16 bit editing myth or reality?
  - From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>