Re: wide histograms was: That old jpg v. RAW argument again...

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



try http://www.reindeergraphics.com/free.shtml for a photoshop plug-in for 

Best regards, 
Deen
2004-09-16 10:36:46

-- 
Deen Hameed
0405 649 101 deenhameed@xxxxxxxxxxxx  
http://www.deenhameed.blogspot.com
http://calendar.yahoo.co.uk/deenhameed
  
At 2004-09-16, 10:01:51 karl shah-jenner (shahjen@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>> The fact is that the real application for 16bit/channel images (except
>for
>> some rare applications), is for, as I said above, digital retouching.
>With
>> 16bit/channel the digital retouching algorythms has a lot more
>information
>> to work with, and specially when you are working on black and white
>images,
>> 16bit/channel will be very useful on conversions, and the feared
>"histogram
>> gaps" will be very rare.
>
>just a point regarding the histogram gaps - the histogram tool is a small
>graphical representation in Photoshop that is only 128 pixels wide on the
>screen and while 8 bit images will show gaps in theat graph more readily
>than 16 bit images, a larger graph will show that many 16 bit images which
>appear to have no gaps in the photoshop histogram to actually DO have gaps,
>they're just not represented on such a small graph.
>
>
>>
>> I can talk more about histogram gaps and 16bit/channel treatment on black
>> and white images, if you find it interesting.
>>
>> I wrote an article specifically about this, wich is online here:
>>
>> http://www.fotopunto.com/?a=articles&aa=view&article_id=20
>>
___ END OF QUOTED TEXT ___


[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux