Reading mode: Light Dark

14 bit vs 12bit raw when the best monitors only output 10 bits?

Go to last post
Y

Yorkmiester

Well-known member
Messages
109
Reaction score
30
I've been giving this some thought as I am shopping for calibrated monitors in a wide gamut blah blah blah.

What I've come to realise is as follows.
  • Many monitors output either 6 or 8 bit of colors
  • Many monitors do not even cover all of sRGB color gamut
Which means, that all our hard work and storage and performance loss to capture and retain the most information (14 bit) possible, is all for naught right? We don't even have devices that can show up the detail we've captured.

Which means that all the comparisons made between 14 and 12 bit to see what is lost is useless, as we can't even display what is beyond our monitors :-|
photographylife.com

14-bit vs 12-bit RAW - Can You Tell The Difference?

photographylife.com photographylife.com

Am I right, or am I going crazy?
 
The advantage is in latitude, not output. You see the difference when you try to pull shadows/highlights on a JPEG vs a RAW file. I feel like the end product of my PP'd photos does not cover a very wide dynamic range- but I'm glad to have the latitude in data from RAW to get the final product I want.

Still a good point though. I am pretty sure most monitors do at least 10 bit color.

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/
 
Last edited:
sportyaccordy said:
The advantage is in latitude, not output. You see the difference when you try to pull shadows/highlights on a JPEG vs a RAW file. I feel like the end product of my PP'd photos does not cover a very wide dynamic range- but I'm glad to have the latitude in data from RAW to get the final product I want.

Still a good point though. I am pretty sure most monitors do at least 10 bit color.
Click to expand...
 
what's even worst is I used my new computer system and ips monitors for the first time PP a school grad shoot 3 days ago and it was great , one problem that I didn't even think about was skin tone high lights ? their was none on my images looking at the new ips screens, so I went and got the images printed 5x7 orders and their was blown skin tones on some of my images as the lab printer couldn't cope with the wide DR . So I came home to make adjustments on the prints and to my surprise the ips monitors showed no blown high lights, its just going to be more tricky on future PP of my images .

cheers don
 
sportyaccordy said:
The advantage is in latitude, not output. You see the difference when you try to pull shadows/highlights on a JPEG vs a RAW file. I feel like the end product of my PP'd photos does not cover a very wide dynamic range- but I'm glad to have the latitude in data from RAW to get the final product I want.

Still a good point though. I am pretty sure most monitors do at least 10 bit color.
Click to expand...
Yes. And FWIW 14-bit really only helps at low ISO when shadows are pushed very hard.
At higher ISO settings the extra bits are lost in the read noise.

Regards,
 
bclaff said:
sportyaccordy said:
The advantage is in latitude, not output. You see the difference when you try to pull shadows/highlights on a JPEG vs a RAW file. I feel like the end product of my PP'd photos does not cover a very wide dynamic range- but I'm glad to have the latitude in data from RAW to get the final product I want.

Still a good point though. I am pretty sure most monitors do at least 10 bit color.
Click to expand...
Yes. And FWIW 14-bit really only helps at low ISO when shadows are pushed very hard.
At higher ISO settings the extra bits are lost in the read noise.

Regards,
Click to expand...
 
Donald B said:
what's even worst is I used my new computer system and ips monitors for the first time PP a school grad shoot 3 days ago and it was great , one problem that I didn't even think about was skin tone high lights ? their was none on my images looking at the new ips screens, so I went and got the images printed 5x7 orders and their was blown skin tones on some of my images as the lab printer couldn't cope with the wide DR . So I came home to make adjustments on the prints and to my surprise the ips monitors showed no blown high lights, its just going to be more tricky on future PP of my images .

cheers don
Click to expand...
 
bclaff said:
sportyaccordy said:
The advantage is in latitude, not output. You see the difference when you try to pull shadows/highlights on a JPEG vs a RAW file. I feel like the end product of my PP'd photos does not cover a very wide dynamic range- but I'm glad to have the latitude in data from RAW to get the final product I want.

Still a good point though. I am pretty sure most monitors do at least 10 bit color.
Click to expand...
Yes. And FWIW 14-bit really only helps at low ISO when shadows are pushed very hard.
At higher ISO settings the extra bits are lost in the read noise.

Regards,
Click to expand...
 
Yorkmiester said:
Yorkmiester said:
...
Click to expand...
Yeah? that's interesting. so unless you push shadows regularly, 12 bit is enough?
Click to expand...
It may depend on your camera. Many cameras ignore the ISO setting when recording the raw data. If you are exposing for ISO 1600, everything is in "shadow". You need to boost the raw data by 4 stops as compared to exposing for ISO 100.

When the camera records 14 bits of data, there is more detail available when shooting low exposure (high ISO).

The bottom line is that for many cameras the extra bits are helpful anytime you are shooting in low light situations.
 
Yorkmiester said:
bclaff said:
sportyaccordy said:
The advantage is in latitude, not output. You see the difference when you try to pull shadows/highlights on a JPEG vs a RAW file. I feel like the end product of my PP'd photos does not cover a very wide dynamic range- but I'm glad to have the latitude in data from RAW to get the final product I want.

Still a good point though. I am pretty sure most monitors do at least 10 bit color.
Click to expand...
Yes. And FWIW 14-bit really only helps at low ISO when shadows are pushed very hard.
At higher ISO settings the extra bits are lost in the read noise.
Click to expand...
Yeah? that's interesting. so unless you push shadows regularly, 12 bit is enough?
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Michael Fryd said:
Yorkmiester said:
Michael Fryd said:
...
Click to expand...
Yeah? that's interesting. so unless you push shadows regularly, 12 bit is enough?
Click to expand...
It may depend on your camera. Many cameras ignore the ISO setting when recording the raw data.
Click to expand...
Not true. Only some of the Sigma cameras "ignore" the ISO setting.
All the others apply analog gain to accomplish the desired ISO.
(And some additional digital gain to do intermediate and extended ISO, YMMV)
Michael Fryd said:
If you are exposing for ISO 1600, everything is in "shadow". You need to boost the raw data by 4 stops as compared to exposing for ISO 100.

When the camera records 14 bits of data, there is more detail available when shooting low exposure (high ISO).

The bottom line is that for many cameras the extra bits are helpful anytime you are shooting in low light situations.
Click to expand...
Only if the read noise for the camera requires the extra bits.
This only happens at the lowest ISO settings for cameras with very low read noise.
 
Yorkmiester said:
Donald B said:
what's even worst is I used my new computer system and ips monitors for the first time PP a school grad shoot 3 days ago and it was great , one problem that I didn't even think about was skin tone high lights ? their was none on my images looking at the new ips screens, so I went and got the images printed 5x7 orders and their was blown skin tones on some of my images as the lab printer couldn't cope with the wide DR . So I came home to make adjustments on the prints and to my surprise the ips monitors showed no blown high lights, its just going to be more tricky on future PP of my images .

cheers don
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Donald B said:
Yorkmiester said:
Donald B said:
what's even worst is I used my new computer system and ips monitors for the first time PP a school grad shoot 3 days ago and it was great , one problem that I didn't even think about was skin tone high lights ? their was none on my images looking at the new ips screens, so I went and got the images printed 5x7 orders and their was blown skin tones on some of my images as the lab printer couldn't cope with the wide DR . So I came home to make adjustments on the prints and to my surprise the ips monitors showed no blown high lights, its just going to be more tricky on future PP of my images .

cheers don
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Michael Fryd said:
Yorkmiester said:
Michael Fryd said:
...
Click to expand...
Yeah? that's interesting. so unless you push shadows regularly, 12 bit is enough?
Click to expand...
It may depend on your camera. Many cameras ignore the ISO setting when recording the raw data. If you are exposing for ISO 1600, everything is in "shadow". You need to boost the raw data by 4 stops as compared to exposing for ISO 100.

When the camera records 14 bits of data, there is more detail available when shooting low exposure (high ISO).

The bottom line is that for many cameras the extra bits are helpful anytime you are shooting in low light situations.
Click to expand...
That's very interesting, good to know!
 
Yorkmiester said:
Donald B said:
Yorkmiester said:
Donald B said:
what's even worst is I used my new computer system and ips monitors for the first time PP a school grad shoot 3 days ago and it was great , one problem that I didn't even think about was skin tone high lights ? their was none on my images looking at the new ips screens, so I went and got the images printed 5x7 orders and their was blown skin tones on some of my images as the lab printer couldn't cope with the wide DR . So I came home to make adjustments on the prints and to my surprise the ips monitors showed no blown high lights, its just going to be more tricky on future PP of my images .

cheers don
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Donald B said:
Yorkmiester said:
Donald B said:
Yorkmiester said:
Donald B said:
what's even worst is I used my new computer system and ips monitors for the first time PP a school grad shoot 3 days ago and it was great , one problem that I didn't even think about was skin tone high lights ? their was none on my images looking at the new ips screens, so I went and got the images printed 5x7 orders and their was blown skin tones on some of my images as the lab printer couldn't cope with the wide DR . So I came home to make adjustments on the prints and to my surprise the ips monitors showed no blown high lights, its just going to be more tricky on future PP of my images .

cheers don
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yorkmiester said:
... Is there a sRGB mode on your screen that you can flip to and just see those colors?
Click to expand...
Can't speak for Donald B, but the NEC Spectraview PA series, and presumably most Eizo monitors, can be calibrated to a variety of gamuts. Then you select the one you want at the moment from a dropdown menu.

The online Cambridge in Colour tutorial essays about color management, monitors, and prints are excellent. You can dive in here:

Working Space Comparison: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB 1998

www.cambridgeincolour.com www.cambridgeincolour.com

then go to the Home page and read more.
 
Yorkmiester said:
I've been giving this some thought as I am shopping for calibrated monitors in a wide gamut blah blah blah.

What I've come to realise is as follows.
  • Many monitors output either 6 or 8 bit of colors
  • monitors do not even cover all of sRGB color gamut
Many Which means, that all our hard work and storage and performance loss to capture and retain the most information (14 bit) possible, is all for naught right? We don't even have devices that can show up the detail we've captured.

Which means that all the comparisons made between 14 and 12 bit to see what is lost is useless, as we can't even display what is beyond our monitors :-|
https://photographylife.com/14-bit-vs-12-bit-raw

Am I right, or am I going crazy?
Click to expand...
As bclaff says, there are only a few situations where 14-bit raws are better than 12-bit raws.

What no one has said is that raw depth is linear and (AFAIK, I don't have a 10-bit monitor), monitor colour depths have already had a "gamma" curve applied so are not linear; thus the two are not really directly comparable.

The reason the monitors have increasing bit-depths is so that one can not see the "step's" in colour/brightness gradients, and in fact when images are viewed as a whole with most of the entire range covered, eight bits are sufficient. Ten bit monitors help when viewed in certain viewing conditions (generally dark) and one focuses on a small portion of the screen, where they help avoid the perception of "steps".

As far as dynamic range covered, it is very difficult to see 10 stops of dynamic range (as most modern monitors specify - 1000:1 - they are capable of) due to ambient light glare and flare, nor do most images have that much anyway for the same reasons - glare and flare of the lens.

Thus, eight bit ("gamma'd") monitors are more than adequate for general use, but ten bit monitors would be fine as long as the price increment to get them isn't too high.

Generally, the same goes for colour gamut: the majority of colours fall within sRGB but Adobe RGB does extend the range of colours slightly in orange/yellow, and especially in cyan and green (some that are so green as to not occur in nature); thus again one can get the wider gamut monitor (and deal with the complexities of colour profiles to be able to use them properly) or just be content with something close to sRGB.

Regards, GordonBGood
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
X2Dii 14-bit vs 16-bit dynamic range
Replies
1
Views
5K
SrMi
SrMi
I
12-bit compressed vs 14-bit uncompressed RAW
Replies
14
Views
3K
Kaj E
Kaj E
JohnNewman
10-bit Heif files in camera
Replies
10
Views
6K
Brett8883
B
M
Does the OM-1 have 14 bit?
2
Replies
27
Views
12K
Mitrajoon
M
Scottelly
16 bit color vs 14 bit color
2 3
Replies
41
Views
9K
NAwlins Contrarian
N

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top