mike wilson wrote: >As everyone is posting flower pictures, here's mine. > >Converted from RAW in PLab, resized in PS6. > >http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/channel/52/extra/new/display/6022920 > >Not really a good example - I'm still looking for something that shows >clearly what I'm talking about. > > I think what you are trying to say, is that sometimes you can notice just by looking at the picture the fact that a digital image actually has a finite number of discrete colours, and also a (lower) finite number of shades of one colour - where I suppose a traditional print had more of a continuous range. (And generally you want the range to be perceived as continuous, even with digital.)
Maybe you are right. Perhaps 24 bits (which is what you usually see on screen) isn't quite enough under some circumstances, or perhaps the problem is that the number of "effective" bits after processing is actually lower (and so low that you notice...) I don't think this is unique to a fully digital setup, though - I believe I've seen the same thing with "modern" prints from film, which are also digitally processed, of course. - Toralf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
