Same 6 bit color? I bet it is.

Sadly, all we have for color depth in the tech specs is the same old 'support for millions of colors' which we know in the past to have been a total lie. All the laptop displays have been 6 bit color, 262,144 colors, period. A great article on 6 bit versus 8 bit color can be found at:
http://compreviews.about.com/od/multimedia/a/LCDColor.htm
The tech specs for the new laptops don't indicate any improvement.
And yes, the displays use dithering to fake millions of colors. Yes, all displays use mixing of RGB colors to fool the eye into seeing millions of colors. And yes, not one laptop display I am aware of, including PCs, has adequate color depth to allow any real color matching for professional use. Use a high end external display for color matching purposes. CRTs are still considered adequate if not superior for this purpose.

Umm...
Every laptop has 6bit colors. There aren't any 8bit laptop panels that Apple could use infact. Except for some very new 17" ones...
The thing is, 8 bit panels use more power and are regarded by most of the industry as overkill for laptops.
Anyway I repeat, there are no 13" 8bit panels in existence.
You want 8 bit color? Plug in a CinemaHD or a Dell VA or IPS panel.

Similar Messages

New MacBook Air display has same 6 bit color? I bet it does.

Sadly, all we have for color depth in the tech specs is the same old 'support for millions of colors' which we know in the past to have been a total lie. All the laptop displays have been 6 bit color, 262,144 colors, period. A great article on 6 bit versus 8 bit color can be found at:
http://compreviews.about.com/od/multimedia/a/LCDColor.htm
The tech specs for the new laptops don't indicate any improvement.
And yes, the displays use dithering to fake millions of colors. Yes, all displays use mixing of RGB colors to fool the eye into seeing millions of colors. And yes, not one laptop display I am aware of, including PCs, has adequate color depth to allow any real color matching for professional use. Use a high end external display for color matching purposes. CRTs are still considered adequate if not superior for this purpose.

Umm...
Every laptop has 6bit colors. There aren't any 8bit laptop panels that Apple could use infact. Except for some very new 17" ones...
The thing is, 8 bit panels use more power and are regarded by most of the industry as overkill for laptops.
Anyway I repeat, there are no 13" 8bit panels in existence.
You want 8 bit color? Plug in a CinemaHD or a Dell VA or IPS panel.

16 bits color?

A client complained about the colors in a movie. As it turns
out they see boundaries of mc's and text fields (in text fields
it's the rendeing area of the text, not the complete text field) in
a slightly lighter tint than the background. I tried to replicate
it and had to set my display to 16 bits.
Solution? Limit the color scheme to web safe?
How 'common' is 16 bits color? Isn't this something from the
middle ages?

Web safe probably won't help (it may be slightly better, or
may be worse)
The problem is a bug in the player .. it renders solid colors
differently to
image / gradient fills (and in some other cases). its also
uses different
rending when transparency is involved
If the problem is due to a solid color fill being next to a
gradient/image
color, then you can solve the problem by using a gradient
with only a single
color in it for the solid fill.
Apart from the fact that web safe colors are not web-safe at
all (apart from
a handful, like a handful of blues and the primary colors) it
really won't
make a significant different (the web-safeness of the color
is not the
issues here)
Just have a think on this for a moment .... No matter WHAT
color system you
use on a screen (8-bit, 16-bit, 24-bit, 32-bit), if the PC is
trying to
output a given RGB color, it will display the same everywhere
on that screen
.. it may be different to what some other computer would
show, but it would
be consistent across the screen. So the problem is that Flash
really is
trying to display different colors on different pixels where
it should be
trying to display the same color (if it wasn't for the bugs
in how it
renders). Now, changing what color is there may increase or
lessen the
visible difference, but it is unlike to help (unless you do
something like
use pure black or pure white etc, which I think Flash manages
to get right)
NOTE: There is a technote that tries to explain away why this
happen so it
doesn't look like it's a bug (technotes are good at that).
But it really is
a bug.
Jeckyl

Two files, same pantone color...Onscreen looks like two different colors?

Recently we have been having this issue at work, We have a line of packaging that uses the same pantone color (375 C). When we go to create a new document and use that same pantone the color onscreen looks more saturated then its predecessor. The only think I can think of is that I've upgrade to the pantone plus system but have since uninstalled and reinstalled the old color books. Both documents are in CMYK color space and both use the same ICC profile. Any thoughts? I know it wont appear this way when printed but we make a lot of PDFs for approvals and the colors come out more saturated in the PDF as well. See sample image below. Thanks for your help!

Try copying a sample of 375C from Document A into document B. If the Doc A swatch magically changes color to match the doc B swatch the you have a document with either a modified or old color that uses the same EXACT SAME name. This happens when someone modifies the CMYK values PANTONE 375 C does not change the name of the color. What Illustrator does is the AUTOMATICALLY changes the color mode of Doc A swatch from CMYK to Book color, when you paste an item having the same swatch name. You do not even get a about to merge color warning. For that reason if I ever tweak a color to get a better laser print, I change the name (eg: PANTONE 375C (Mod)
Though I feel one of Wade's 2 suggestions may be right, this also can cause color difference.

Rendering as 10-bit/12-bit color (JPEG 2000?)

I'm not trying to create a digital cinema package (DCP) per se, but I've got a few questions related to rendering in bit depths greater than 8-bit.
NOTE: The digital cinema standard (PDF link, see page 31) for package distribution is JPEG 2000 files with 12-bit color (in XYZ color space)...packaged into the MXF container format.
1. I'm wondering if it's possible to render to any 10-bit or 12-bit color format within After Effects. Let's assume my source is a 16bpc or 32bpc comp, and I render it to the QuickTime container and select JPEG2000 or one of the other variants. None of them seems to go above "millions of colors", or 8-bit. (The one that has the option of "millions of colors plus" still only renders to planar 8-bit [YUV 4:2:0] when I inspect its streams and metadata.)
2. In the QuickTime container list, what are "Motion JPEG-A" and "Motion JPEG-B"? These aren't standards with which I'm familiar, and I can't seem to find any detail in the documentation as to what these actually are. (In all my tests, they're limited to 8-bit color.)
3. Is the JPEG 2000 codec that's available via QuickTime the same JPEG 2000 codec that's literally the full ISO/IEC 15444 or SMPTE 429-4 standard, or some crippled bits-and-pieces version?
Obviously, I can render to TIFF or OpenEXR sequences in 16bpc or full float...I was just wondering if it was possible to get 10-bit or 12-bit color in a standard container via After Effects CC or Premiere Pro CC (via Media Encoder CC).
I see the "render at maximum bit depth" option in Premiere Pro, but I've never found a format/container that would output anything higher than 8-bit color...even with 16bpc or 32bpc input media.
Thanks for your help and insight.

If you want highter bit depth J2K, you have to render to image sequences. The baseline QT implementation is from the stone age. Perhaps there's some commercial third-party Codec out there or if you have such hardware, you could use Blackmagic's, but off the bat there is nothing usable in QT as far as I know.
Mylenium

Working with 32 bit color HDRs in Lightroom

The feature of being able to work with 32 bit color Tiff files in Lightroom is awesome and wonderful. However, I note that when I do not follow the recommended workflow of bringing the 32 bit file directly back into Lightroom to work on it - working on it with Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop first - the results are somewhat confusing. I'm fine with following the recommended workflow except for the fact that I seem to be able to come up with even better results quite quickly using ACR. ACR appears to give me a greater tonal range to work with, but when I save the file as a Tiff and take it back to Lightroom the colors aren't displayed correctly by Lightroom. There is a huge difference between viewing the file in Photoshop and viewing it in LR. If I work on the file immediately in LR, avoiding doing anything in PS, the files look identical in both programs, but at the apparent cost of losing a lot of exposure range to play with. Am I correct in inferring that LR is working on the 32 bit colors using a 16 bit color depth conversion in the tools?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106834366/Redux%20Vidz.aep
This is kind of a project-ruining issue not being able to render it out in 32-bit -- I'm working with a lot of gradients and lens blurs.
Anyone have any hints of why this might be happening?

PSE 8 refused to handle 16 bit color

When I tryed to Import some foto I took last in to PSE 8 and photo-Panorama section
I got the following message Photoshop Elements with a triangle and yellow[ ! ] This action cannot be performed on a file with 16 bit color depth
Do you want to convert to 8 bits/channel
The other problem it did not load all the fotos that I had check to be loaded
Any ideas as to why this happened
Camera was Pentax K10D which should not be the problem?

In lightroom under File>Export, you should be able to export your files as 8 bit.
Also you might have a look at this plugin for lightroom, which lets lightroom
use photoshop elements much as it uses photoshop.
http://thephotogeek.com/lightroom/elemental/
I tried several times in the past to use 16 bit files with photomerge and while it
worked sometimes, other times i had the same problem your having. So i decided
just to convert my files to 8 bit and avoid all that. (photomerge does this anyway)
I suspect that's the reason you had trouble opening the rest of your files after
the first one in photomerge.
MTSTUNER

Photoshop with 16 bit colors

Hi,
Is it possible to work with 16 bit colors in Photoshop ?
I have some bitmaps, where I would like to change the colortable from 24 bit colors to 16 bit colors.
Thanks,
best regards,
Poul

Let us consider the possibilities of the file format Windows Bitmap BMP. Photoshop can save
as BMP with different color depths, but this has nothing to do with "Photoshop Bitmap".
Mode Indexed color (BMP, 8 bit per pixel) uses a color look-up table, a CLUT:
256 rows with 3 bytes for R, G and B (one byte each).
The image contains for each pixel one byte, which is a pointer to the CLUT, from where the
color bytes are taken. Finally we have a 24 bit per pixel color representation (True color).
For GIF it's almost the same, but one row in the CLUT means transparency.
Building the CLUT for an image which may contain originally 256^3 diffent colors is called
Color quantization (a key word for a further search).
If the display should require a smaller number of bits, e.g. 5R, 6G, 5B (green is more accurate),
then the CLUT can be taken from the Indexed color BMP image and modified:
R: Shift right 3 bits and round
G: Shift right 2 bits and round
B: Shift right 3 bits and round
Assemble R,G,B in one word with 16 bit.
Similarly, if the display should require 5R, 5G, 5B.
Such a table cannot be generated directly by Photoshop.
Mode High color (BMP, 16 bit per pixel) does not use a CLUT. Perhaps, at the time when these
file formats were developed, a CLUT with 2^16 rows was considered as nonsensical.
Photoshop can generate a BMP image with 16 bit per pixel by one of three modes, as explained
earlier in my previous post.
Thus it is possible to convert an image, which contains an arbitrary number of "swatches"
as defined by True Color 24 bit per pixel, into High color 16 bit per pixel by Photoshop. From the
result one can take the coding and build a table.
Arbitrary means: up to the maximal number, e.g. 32*64*32 swatches for 5R 6G 5B.
The further proceeding depends strongly on the decision only 256 colors / more colors.
Accepting the 16 bit per pixel limit, one may use a fixed full size CLUT and an automatic conversion
True Color – High Color with Dithering.
Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann

Why does the Illustrator "trap" command trap the same spot colors in opposite ways?

I can not understand how Illustrator decides which way to expand something when using the "trap" command. According to their tutorial it expands the lighter-colored artwork over the darker artwork, unless you choose to reverse traps. But in practise, where two objects of the same color meet, it will frequenrly trap them in one direction in one place and the opposite direction in the other.
Here's an example with especially large traps:
The two yellow items are defined as the same spot color and are a single compound path. There is just the one simple shape of spot red and one simple shape of spot pink.
On the left yellow object, it expands yellow over pink. On the right, it expands pink over yellow. On the left yellow object, it expands red over yellow. On the right, it expands yellow over red.
There is no possible print order of these three spot colors that would result in the correct object shapes being printed the way this is trapped. Is this just a bug? Can anyone explain this result, or especially how to make it work in a useable way?
All objects are spot colors that are cut out from each other so there were no overlaps.

Here's what it looks like with overprint preview:
It still looks wrong.
This view is glossing over how bad it would really look with screen printing, because the inks are much higher opacity than they're previewing here. I suppose that's what you're getting at, that the trapping may be bad for screen printing, but if you're assuming offset press inks that have next to no opacity and will mix together on press, that it doesn't matter which way you trap. Overprint preview makes yellow overprinting pink look the same as pink overprinting yellow. With spot colors in screen printing, that is no where near the case.
But even consdiering that, this trapping is wrong, the final shapes of the objects are changed by the trapping. And the trapping does not appear to follow Adobe's own description of the logic used, or any kind of consistency. Why would it expand yellow into pink in some places and pink into yellow in others?
I've heard the trapping in Indesign is much better, some screen printers open in Indesign to add trapping... maybe I'll look at that.

Macbook Pro & Mini Dispalyport Does NOT Support 10 bit Color Monitors

I am extremely concerned regarding Apple's Mini Displayport. Mini Displayport has been out for a year now, and is the video out port with the maximum signal output on Macbook Pro's. Apple's Mini Displayport still does not offer the compatibility and performance, that is possible with the standard Displayport implantation on Windows.
Case in point two monitors from NEC and Eizo, the NEC PA214W and the Eizo CG223W:
http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/cg223w/index.html
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=5a6621b9-e9c4-4f02-8542-e625 1364bf7c
All current Macbook Pro's with Mini Displayport are unable to support the 10 bit color that these monitors are capable of. This is unacceptable, and an example of Apple leading customers to believe that Mini Displayport, offers the same capabillities and performance as Displayport.
It is my understanding that on paper MBP's with the NVidia 9400/9600 are capable of outputting a 10 bit signal. They just do not at this point in time, unlike all PC notebooks with Displayport. Mini Displayport has been sold by Apple as being every bit as capable only smaller than Displayport. The truth is it is not.
Apple notebooks can not currently produce the same level of quality on these monitors as Windows notebooks with Displayport that have also been on the market for a year now.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/newsarchive/19.htm#10-bitips

Displayport:
http://www.displayport.org/consumer/
http://www.displayport.org/consumer/?q=content/faq
"Performance for a display interface is really bandwidth. So Displayport offers up to 10.8 Gigabits per second. That bandwidth can be allocated for greater color depth (more colors per pixel, i.e.. 30 bit color monitors), it can be allocated to resolution, i.e.. WQXGA , or refresh rate."
Note: The bandwidth has increased to 21.6 Gbps with the announcement of Displayport v1.2.
It appears to me that aside from the top of the line (Windows PC) notebooks, that the only systems that will currently be able to achieve 30 bit color with these monitors are going to be desktop systems with Displayport/Mini Displayport and the necessary GPU and Operating System. This is an example of the difficulty in getting accurate information when it comes to what a system can and can not do. Rod correctly pointed out that I was mistaken in saying that "all" PC notebooks with Displayport are capable of achieving 10 bit per channel output, some do not. As BSteely, Lewis, and Rod have discussed Mini Displayport is not what is responsible for the fact that Macbook Pros can not currently output 10 bit per channel signal. Displayport exists and allows for this capability, and I stand by my opinion that currently Macbook Pros with Mini Displayport do not implement the full Displayport spec, in particular the ability to output 10 bit per channel signal to 30 bit color monitors. On the PC side it is the "workstation" class notebooks that have had and continue to have this capability. There may be others, but in reviewing Dell, HP, and Lenovo I am only finding it in the Precision, W series, and Elitebook models. The latest T Series Thinkpads with Quadro GPU's may work as well. At this point, I am not going to research each and every model to determine exactly which notebook models and configurations will work, except to say none of them are Macbook Pros. The lesson here should be get multiple confirmations regarding your system's configuration and your intentions in its use. I was mistaken in my understanding that the MBP 17 with Mini Displayport would support the Displayport spec as it relates to 30 bit color monitors. I have stated what I think is wrong about that, but that is the way it is for now. Apple is not the only company to hype a technology, only to offer a limited implementation of it. "Vista Capable" comes to mind.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?a rticleID=212100567
This post will hopefully alert others to this limitation. To end on a positive note, in my experience the last six months with my Macbook Pro, Apple has demonstrated it can resolve issues quickly and effectively, and I have been extremely pleased to the extent that they have worked with me to address the few significant issues that have come up, including a system replacement in quick order. This may or may not be something they will be able to address with the current Macbook Pros or even the next generation. We will see.

1,280 x 1,024 32-bit color video display adapter (true color) 128 MB or greater, Direct3D capable

I want to run AutoCad 2009 and work in 3d. Which lenovo meets the minimum reqs.? i.e. Intel or AMD Dual Core processor, 2.0 GHz or greater • 2 GB RAM or greater • 2 GB free hard disk available not including installation • 1,280 x 1,024 32-bit color video display adapter (true color) 128 MB or greater, OpenGL®, or Direct3D® capable workstation class graphics card. For Windows Vista, a Direct3D-capable workstation-class graphics card with 128 MB or greater is required.
Which model is the least exspensive with the minumum reqs.?
Clarification: I want to run AutoCad 2009 in 3d. Re: 1,280 x 1,024 32-bit color . . .
Note from Moderator: Please don't post the same message in multiple boards/threads as it splinters the discussion. Duplicate(s) removed.
Message Edited by JaneL on 02-08-2009 10:01 PM
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Any ThinkPad with discrete or switchable graphics will work...T400/500, R400/500, W500/700...make sure that you're not getting the one with Intel integrated GPU and you'll be all set...
FWIW, even T61/p with discrete GPU will run this with no sweat...
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
George
In daily use: R60F, R500F, T61, T410
Collecting dust: T60
Enjoying retirement: A31p, T42p,
Non-ThinkPads: Panasonic CF-31 & CF-52, HP 8760W
Starting Thursday, 08/14/2014 I'll be away from the forums until further notice. Please do NOT send private messages since I won't be able to read them. Thank you.

16-bit color support

I have PSE 6 which has limited support for 16-bit color images. Does PSE 8 now allow images to be edited using 16-bit color depth?

It's basically the same in PSE 8.

10 Bit Color From Displayport in 5.02

I noticed this was either fixed or added in the latest release. I have a Quadro 5000 with DisplayPort and HP ZR30w 10 Bit Color monitors with DisplayPort.
Is there anything I need to configure in Winodws 7 or Premiere Pro to make sure I am seeing 10 Bit Color. 10 Bit files look amazing and I see
no banding but I want to make sure I have it set up right.
Thanks,
Carlos Morillo

I have ran several searches for DisplayPort, Display Port, Display-Port and have found nothing. The searches I ran for 10 Bit Color, 10-Bit Color, High Depth Color, all returned results that seem to be specific to the AVI v210 Codec in Desktop Mode and/or SDI. There are many other file formats that
handle greater than 8 Bit Color and would like to make sure I am actually seeing that through my monitor. Just switched to the quadro and the HP 10 Bit display and I want to know that it's set up right. If I am missing something from the Premiere Pro CS5 PDF file could some one please point me to the right page? I ran I a search for just the word "color" and still found no answer. According to the notes on 5.02, 10 Bit Color through DisplayPort works.
Is it just automatic when you have a 10 Bit Sequence and 10 Bit or greater files? I Know you can render using High Depth Color and Maximum quality but I don't think that's the same as actually seeing 10 Bit color on screen since those options are availbale to you even when you are on an 8 Bit Sequence with 8 Bit Files.
Thanks,

Will Photoshop CS6 display 30-bit-color with two GPUs?

Hello there!
I think about purchasing a small Nvidia Quadro, which supports 30-bit-color, since its not available on my currrent GTX 780Ti running on Windows 7 Ulitimate x64.
It is not a big deal to set the quadro, once installed, as the responsible GPU for color and OpenCL-acceleration...
BUT:
as long as the 780Ti has around 999999x times more computing-power than the small quadro (around 250 €), it would be nice to profit
of this as well. at the same time.
So: is there a way to use the Quadro purely for "displaying and color" and the 780ti for accelerating tasks in Photoshop CS6?
I'm afraid not..
but cheer me up pls.
Thanks in advance!

Thank you for the quick response!
unfortunately that's what I expected to hear.
It's a shame that Nvidia wont enable the 30-bit-feature under windows or mac until you
spend a few thousand euros for a K5000 or K6000
I hope that there will be a workaround for that soon. (maybe some tweaked quadro-drivers as I read a few years ago)
Thanks so far!

16-bit color depth for gradients?

Hello,
I have created gradient backgrounds inside of inDesign CS6 but see some color banding in offset printer's color proofs. Is there a setting/option to set inDesign to generate its color gradients at 16-bit color depth?
Thanks in advance.
Jeffrey

Then open and rasterize in Photoshop, where you can specify both the resolution and bit depth.
Jeffery, It seems like that should work, but if you look closely at the histograms it doesn't look like you get 16-bits of gray levels. Here's a black to white blend exported to PDF/X-4 and opened as 8 and 16 bit CMYK. The black channel histograms are the same:
If there were more than 256 levels of gray in the 16-bit version I should be able to make a correction without gaps showing in the histogram, but that doesn't happen:
If I make the black channel blend in Photoshop I can make the same correction without gaps:

Same 6 bit color? I bet it is.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for