On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:52:06PM -1000, david wrote: > I work with 48-bit color TIF images, with color dynamic ranges way > beyond any printer or monitor's ability to differentiate them. Sort > of the equivalent (to me) of 96 or 192KHz sample rates. The equivalent of more bits per sample really. For images that certainly makes sense - nobody ever claimed that 8 bits per component were sufficient, plus there is the disadvantage of non-linear reproduction (gamma). The equivalent of higher sample rates for images is higher resolution, and again this makes sense. When working on images, operations that amount to resampling are much more frequent than they are in typical audio processing (any change of size means resampling). In audio there is nothing *wrong* with working at higher sample rates, but generally nothing is gained by doing it. Except that some algorithms may become easier to implement. For example zita-at1 (auto-tuner) will do parts of its internal processing using the double sample rate when working in 44.1 or 48 kHz. Ciao, -- FA There are three of them, and Alleline. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
