CS 16 bits - Where Will I See the Difference?

[sc21]

I'm debating moving up to Photoshop CS, and one of my hang-ups is

just how much I'd be getting out of 16 bit files.

 

I use a Canon 10D and Elements 2.0, and usually print no larger than

11x16, sending the files to Shutterfly.

 

What difference would I see in using 16 bits, and would I have to

shoot RAW to get them? (The RAW converter is another pull towards CS.)

 

Thanks.

[rodolfo_negrete]

I think that ther RAW is the best reason alone.I would not live with out CS now that I have it.

[jeffrey moore]

Working in 16-bit mode is not relevant to what print size you create. The benefit of working in 16-bit mode versus 8-bit is related to gradation and tonality in your print. Working in 16-bit simply gives you much more headroom for purposes of editing. Here's a good exercise to give you a good visual demonstration of the concept: Take an image in 16-bit mode, then make a copy of it in 8-bit mode. Make identical curves or levels adjustments to each image, then convert the 16-bit image to 8-bit, review the respective histograms of each image and you will then see the benefit of working in 16-bit mode.

[EricM]

but can you see a difference in your print with these two examples?

[kelly_flanigan1]

Imagine you knowing your bank balance every day to the nearest 20 dollars; 1 dollar; one penny. Imagine it is rounded up or down; to the nearest value mentioned each night....Will you See a Difference?

[spencer b]

Kelly, go to bed. you're not making any sence.

[beno_t_marchal]

<p>Steve

<p>16 bits gives you more room for color-correction, contrast, etc. (essentially levels and

curves). I also helps with some filters (blur) and resizing but the difference is marginal for

those. 16 bits is mostly about curves and levels.

<p>What I do: I find 8 bits more convenient (smaller files, faster processing) and most of

my photos (including all the snapshots, the tests and all the "could have been great but

not quite") don't need dramatic color/contrast editing. So I shoot RAW and color/contrast

correct in the RAW converter (which works on the 12 bits from the camera) and output an

8 bits images that is essentially correct color-wise for 95% of my photos.

<p>The remaining 5% images are either shoot that still need curves applied or for which I

plan extensive editing (e.g. soft-focus, etc.) because eventually they too will need curves.

<p>16 bits is fantastic. It's great to know you can pull that much data when you need it

but it would be a mistake to think every image needs 16 bits.

<p>Regarding RAW, yes, to get the 16 bits of data, you will need to shoot RAW (or scan

film).

<p>--ben<br><a href="http://www.marchal.com">marchal.com</a>

[sc21]

Thanks, Jeffrey - the only thing is, with Elements I can't work with 16 bit files to check it out. I did try Capture One LE, working on the same images in both programs and showing them on the screen at once, and the 16 bit one did seem to have more tonal range and color.

 

So I get how the histogram won't get all jagged, but that's not the same as seeing the print.

 

Is it possible that someone out there could post identical prints that were done in 8-bit nad 16-bit mode? Or even one pair with minimal levels adjusted, and one pair with a lot?

 

And hey, about the money in the bank, the former governer of Maine, Angus King, once gave a speech telling us to round the checking in our bankbooks to the nearest dollar. He said it would all even out in the end, and save us a lot of time and bother. Most helpful tip I ever got from a politician.

[john_bean]

Steve, download the 30-day trial of CS and try it for yourself, it's the only way to be sure that you will benefit from the upgrade.

[andrew_rodney1]

You'll see a difference if you edit the 8-bit file to the point that you introduce enough data

loss to show banding. That will highly depend on the output device. You may never see

this on a halftone dot output (ink on paper on a press) and see it on a contone printer

(Lightjet). If you have no idea what or where the image will be printed, working in high bit

(more than 8-bits) means you can edit without worrying about this data loss unless you do

something really radical (in which case the original was junk anyway).

 

Some, very few output devices will use the additional data. But you can count on one hand

the number of RIPs or devices that can use more than 8-bits per color. The ImagePrint RIP

is one product that will use that data. Seeing the difference however will largely depend on

the image itself. But the data *could* be used if you have it.

 

Andrew Rodney

http://digitaldog.net/

[sc21]

Thanks, John. I got that bookmarked for a ten-hour download. I would've tried it before, but some downloads make you start all over if the connection gets broken, which mine does every hour.