Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
Given that 8 bits per channel is the most that can be displayed by the average monitor, how exactly do you propose to demonstrate the problem?
Sobotka: Why GIMP is inadequate
Posted Jan 11, 2011 17:51 UTC (Tue) by prokoudine (guest, #41788)
Just check histogram after editing. You get hair-comb after levels and curves in 8bpc.
Posted Jan 11, 2011 18:11 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
People hating the 8-bit limit has little to do with displaying colors on your monitor, unless they are just parroting. The 8-bit limit comes into play when it comes to _processing_ your images.
You can see it any time you want with Gimp if you play around with multiple layers and run a few filters. Before long you'll start seeing visual artifacts start showing up. Colors that are wrong, weird L-shaped artifacts, lots of graininess, and errors that look like the sort of things you get from highly compressed jpeg images.
One of the nice things about digital art is the ability to twist and deconstruct images to make new images. Like how you can take audio samples of every day things, manipulate them, and make music out of things.
With just 8-bits then this makes the process a lot more time consuming, depending on what your aiming for.
Posted Jan 12, 2011 11:21 UTC (Wed) by nye (guest, #51576)
Indeed. To be clear, I was addressing the complaint that the article should have more convincingly shown the problem, which struck me as unfair.
Posted Jan 11, 2011 18:36 UTC (Tue) by foom (subscriber, #14868)
You can tell if you have a bad screen just by pulling down a menu, and look at the gradient shadow effect on the edge. You will see horrible banding. If you look at the screen from an angle, it's even more obvious (vertically usually works better). On an "average" display, you can see the dithering effect if you really look, but it isn't nearly so bad.
Oops, sorry for the diversion/rant. :)
Posted Jan 11, 2011 21:51 UTC (Tue) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185)
Posted Jan 12, 2011 12:40 UTC (Wed) by romanfi (guest, #72329)
> Given that 8 bits per channel is the most that can be
> displayed by the average monitor, how exactly do
> you propose to demonstrate the problem?
You can always look at the histogram.
And probably you want to do that after converting between color profiles, esp. wide gamut profiles like ROMM (Kodak ProPhotoRGB), esp. when you need such color spaces when you do a lot of transformations.
Of course, the average image can easily be handled fine with 8 bits. And the average digitial camera writing JPEGs also delivers no more than that, but who wants to be average?
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds