-
1. Re: Using the Camera RAW interface for JPEG images
Don26812 Jan 4, 2010 3:47 PM (in response to Deep Woods)From a mathematical perspective, it would seem that using the extra information in the up-sampling interpolation calculations would be better. The question is whether or not the extra digits in the calculation would produce a difference in the image. I suspect that it would be quite image dependent. Easy enough to test, with the right kind of image, whatever that is?
Don S.
-
2. Re: Using the Camera RAW interface for JPEG images
Deep Woods Jan 4, 2010 4:16 PM (in response to Don26812)Very good point Don. If we resort to measuring ones and zeros the difference could very well be obvious, but maybe not so when looking at the final outcome of an image. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who applies this method in their workflow.
Your thoughts are much appreciated.
Deep Woods
-
3. Re: Using the Camera RAW interface for JPEG images
dj_paige Jan 4, 2010 6:33 PM (in response to Deep Woods)It is my understanding that changing an image to 16 bits in the Raw editor doesn't really change the results of the editing that you do. There is still only 8bits of information, or 256 distinct colors in a channel. This cannot work as well as images that are truly 12, 14 or 16 bit, which of course have more distinct colors in a channel. With more distinct colors to start from, the algorithms have more data to work from.
-
4. Re: Using the Camera RAW interface for JPEG images
Deep Woods Jan 4, 2010 7:31 PM (in response to dj_paige)This is something I had not realized. It doesn't surprise me that when selecting an option to change the fundamental building blocks of an image, nothing really happens. Painting additional squares on the individual bricks of a building does not increase the amount of material that went into the buildings construction.
Thank you for your thoughts.
Deep Woods


