[argyllcms] Re: testing
- From: Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 13:23:15 -0700
On Oct 12, 2018, at 12:52 PM, Paul Langmead <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
While 16bit data may improve the rendition of gradients and subtle colour
changes, in my experience only a small subset of images benefit from the
extra depth at the printer end.
By the time the data gets sent to the printer, most images aren’t going to be
noticeably different. The biggest thing to look out for is banding in blue
skies.
But...there’s plenty in the pipeline before the printer where you often want
all the bits you can get, and it rarely costs anything extra to send the full
bit depth to the printer. Indeed, if you’ve got an established workflow, trying
to figure out whether or not this one image is one that needs high bits is just
going to slow things down.
So that’s my advice. Do you experimenting up front to establish a workflow that
you’re reasonably confident is going to work for you, and stick with it until
it breaks. Whether that’s initially 8- or 16-bit is something for you to decide
based on what you see. And if you run into problems — either artifacts from
8-bit images or excessive file size from 16-bit images — deal with them
intelligently if and when they actually present themselves.
Cheers,
b&
Other related posts:
