| Author | Message | ||
     Jeff Sheppard New member Username: Scruffie Post Number: 22 Registered: 11-2002 |
Is there any advantage to use a 48-bit image during Advanced Sharpen as compared to 24-bit? Since A/S is normally done at the end of work flow, a 24-bit image would be fine, right? JEFF | ||
| Saulius T. Kondrotas New member Username: Saulius Post Number: 8 Registered: 02-2003 |
There is a consensus that you have to stick to 48 bits as long as you can in your editing process. David Blatner & Bruce Fraser in their book 'Real World Adobe Photoshop' do even suggest that you convert your 24-bit files to 48-bit before you start anything like sharpenning etc. As this doesn't add any information to the image, it gives data points more places to land after any step of editing. | ||
| Jonathan Sachs Board Administrator Username: Admin Post Number: 860 Registered: 08-2002 |
Personally I think you would be hard pressed to see any difference but it can't hurt to use 48 bits other than extra time and memory. Jonathan Sachs Digital Light & Color | ||
| Bob Sheldon Unregistered guest |
I just made a short test of Advanced Sharpening on several photos. The time for noise reduction and sharpening was the same for both the 48 bit and 24 bit versions of the same photos. The time was based on that shown on the progress bars at the start of the process. I did not use a stop watch to actually time the process. Bob Sheldon | ||
| Jeff Sheppard New member Username: Scruffie Post Number: 23 Registered: 11-2002 |
I did some test also, of files that where between 36 MB and 70 MB . I found it took between 7 and 9 percent longer in 48 bit than in 24 bit. Not much to worry about . It seems only true disadvantage with 48 bit file would it take more storage on the hard drive . JeFF |
