8 bit vs. 10 bit video card - observable differences?

[Deliberate1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Friends, I am working with Puget Computers to configure a new box. As we went through the components, we came to the video card and the rep said that I should go with a 10 bit card if my monitor supports it. He indicated that it can create a more nuanced color space. I then read that a 10 bit card can reduce banding in certain circumstances. I contacted NEC and was told that my pro-level monitor does support 10 bit processing. 

Consequently, my question is whether the whatever subtle differences I might detect on a 10 bit monitor with a 10 bit video card will be observable on a print, and if so, under what circumstances. Or is the benefit only detectable, if at all, on the monitor.

Obliged,

David

[Jeff S]

Any link in the print workflow chain.... including camera/lens, operating system, screen, editing software, printer, paper/profile, inks, display lighting, and more....can potentially affect print results.

 

And then there's the most important link.... the user's eye, judgment and skill.

 

Weston made great prints using a light bulb. Others struggle with the most expensive gear.

 

A couple of bits, fine. But let's not lose the forest for the trees.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jrp]

Well if you've got it you may as well use it, but the differences will be v subtle. Can you tell the difference between 8-bit jpegs and 16-bit tiffs on your set-up?

[Deliberate1]

Gents, obliged for your comments. They track the "real world" conversation I had with the tech guy. To your point, jrp, no, I have not been able to visualize the difference between 8 and 16 bit images, though I also understand that if pushed hard, the 16 bit tiff file is going to have more PP malleability than the 8 bit jpg, just as the file from my S 006 will be more robust than one from my M9. 

That said, I have found that the greatest influence on the appearance of a print, no matter my fanatical tweaking, is the piece of glass that goes on top of it, and the lighting of the exhibition space. Frankly, I struggle under those circumstances to discern the difference between paper finishes or manufacturers for that matter. All that said, I have made some images where banding is discernible and gross. Especially in black skies in the area around a bright moon, and blues skies around the sun or other bright light sources. If having a 10 bit vid card would enhance the transitions under those extreme circumstances and diminish or eliminate banding, then I would feel the additional cost of the 10 bit card to be justified.

David

Edited August 29, 2017 by Deliberate1

[Jeff S]

I stock several different glass types, including museum glass when the situation warrants. A print viewing booth can be helpful to preview prints under display lighting conditions. ImagePrint can also be useful since it includes custom profiles for most papers and for different lighting conditions, and has constant soft-proof mode.

 

Many people underestimate the degree to which display conditions matter. All the "bits" in the world can get lost in poor display conditions.

 

Jeff

[Deliberate1]

 

Many people underestimate the degree to which display conditions matter. All the "bits" in the world can get lost in poor display conditions.

 

Jeff

 

Bingo.

[Ko.Fe.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

NDVIA supports 10-bit per channel since 2011.

 

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3011/~/10-bit-per-color-support-on-nvidia-geforce-gpus

 

For example, NVIDIA Quadro K420 supports 10-bit per color channel and where I'm it costs well under 200$. 

 

IMO, It is better to have card where you could enable 10-bit, instead of 8-bit per channel. For future use. You newer know what could happen in next couple of years. All of the sudden OS could be switched to 10-bit. Just because. It is Microsoft, after all.