Photoshop 10bit support

[Guest]

Hello!

There are 16 and 32bit modes in PS, so my question is: can PS display 10bit color depth per channel if all other components support it? (i.e. Windows 7, ATI FirePro graphics card,10bit monitor connected via Displayport)

If not, will there be an update/plugin? Will the next version of PS support it?

I'm thinking about upgrading. Wouldn't make much sense if the software doesn't support it…

Thanks in advance

Hermann

[Guest]

Are you sure that Quadro car will allow you to work with Photoshop CS5 in 10bit mode? As far as I know this feature is available only for ATI FirePro cards. On Quadro it should work but it relay doesn’t. I ask on this thread for updates, but at the moment I haven’t see any Quadro card running CS5 in 10bit properly.

I have some machines where I would really like to install Quadro cards but I haven’t because of this 10 bit issue.

I’d like to have an answer from somebody in the Adobe staff. Thanks!

[gggmmm]

ITAVittorio, you are right. my statement was based on Nvidia claiming 10bpc, but that doesn't mean it works with PS.

an answer from adobe would really be helpful.

specifically for the small Quadro 600 in my case. it puts out 10bpc according to http://www.nvidia.com/docs/IO/40049/NV_DS_QUADRO_600_US_LR.pdf.

does it work with PS already and if not will Nvidia and Adobe provide updates in the future, so it will work?

i dont have a 10bpc monitor yet anyway, but i would like to be able to plan what to buy.

thanks.

[dkg62]

Georg, I am in the same situation as you with the Zotac ZT-50701-10M GEForce GTX 560 ferni, NVidia.

Just built a new PC with the anticipation of using wide gamut or 10 bit color but according to what I read here, that is not possible with my card.

I looks like many people want NVidia to update the driver for this. And the only thing I can determine after scouring their website is that only their Quadro series supports 10 bit in Win7. But oddly they have a driver that will apparently support 10 bit in Linux.

Has anyone heard of any updates from NVidia that they will release an update for the 560? There is nothing on their website to indicate they have or will.

In my case the video card is brand  new, only used to test the system a few times but beyond the return date. So if NVidia is not going to put out a driver I have two options: replace the card with one that supports 10 bit or add a second card.

Option 1: Replace the card: from a price perspactive the NVidia Quadro 600 ($150) and the ATI FirePro V4900 ($165) are close in price to what the Zotac cost. Even though the NVidia Quadro states that it supports 10 bit I've been hard pressed to see reviews so I am hesitant there. The ATI seems to be a better value for the money at least according to Passmark. But the GTX 560 ranked 2719, the Firepro V4900 ranked 1471 and the Quadro 500 ranked 709 (higher score better. So, to get close to what I have with a card that will do 10 bit and is supported by Adobe I would have to double the price of the Quadro or Firepro, which is a lot more than I paid for the GTX 560 to begin with. Am I missing anything?

Option 2: add a second card. Here is where my limited ability fails me. If I read correctly, to add a second card the board needs to support it (mine does in both 2 way SLI and 2 way Crossfire). It appears like both graphics cards have to be identical to run in SLI but not in Crossfire. Is that right?

If that is the case would I be better off just adding a card to my existing card? Would the Quadro 600 be the best to add since they are both NVidia (even though I still have the same concerns - can''t find any success stories using the Quadro whereas I have seen them with the Firepro and an Asus PA246Q monitor).

Last question: if I do have to replace my card, where is a good place to sell a basically new video card? Is it eBay like everything else or are there some specialty sites better?

THANKS for any advice.

[asmil-m]

Hi everybody. I have Ati FireProV4800 and EIZO FlexScan S2243W  with 8 bit panel and 10 bit LUT, with Display Port. I cant' see 10 bit in PS Cs5. ramp.psd appears with banding in PS. I have last driver update of Ati. I set right setting in the driver and in PS.EIZO FlexScan S2243W  support 10 bit or not?  What else can I do?

Thanks for any advice.

[Hudechrome]

If it's an 8 bit panel, I presume that's all it will show, even if drivin as 10 bit.

[asmil-m]

In the EIZO support  -  EIZO FlexScan s2243w is monitor with advanced 8+ bit panel and 10 bit LUT ???  Advanced 8+ bit panel ??? I do not understand the difference between  8 bit,8+ bit  S-PVA panels ?

[Hudechrome]

There are others here that do understand the panel technology better than I do. My perspective is similar to printers; you can send 16 bit info to a printer but if the device can only print 8 bit levels that's all you get.

Maybe screens are otherwise.

Anyone?

[Lundberg02]

8+  probably means dithered as some are.

[Mike_Ornellas]

More is just more, not better. That is why Apple really could care less about giving more if you dont need it.

[Noel Carboni]

Seems to me people wouldn't be wanting more if it was not better under certain specific conditions they care about.  The check for whether you have achieved 30 bit operation is a gradient display with which you can actually SEE the discrete levels. 

If a person can SEE the degradation, and that matters to them, then they should have options for eliminating it.

It's pretty obvious that not everyone agrees that the same level of display quality is acceptable.  Some people may care very much whether they see posterization in the preview images on their display, while others may feel a loose facsimile is good enough... 

Lundberg has recently commented in another thread that an egregiously inaccurate rendering of a gray gradient looked okay to him, yet I find it offensive.  On the other hand, I have an 8 bit display pipeline and I find it just fine for doing Photoshop work.  Then there are the folks participating in this thread who find an 8 bit pipeline unacceptable and are willing to spend for more.

What I think is funny, though, is that zoomed-out resolutions Photoshop provides a speed-optimized (and sometimes quite inaccurate) facsimile of a layered document - even when the document is 16 bits/channel, unless some very specific configuration choices are made (outside the 30 Bit Display setting).  Yet we really haven't seen that discussed here much.

-Noel

[Hudechrome]

I don't understand the last paragraph. Zoomed out resolutions? Speed optimized facsimile of a layered image? What's there to know that we can discuss?

[Noel Carboni]

Hudechrome wrote:

I don't understand the last paragraph. Zoomed out resolutions? Speed optimized facsimile of a layered image? What's there to know that we can discuss?

Scenario:  You have a multi-layer document in Photoshop, displayed on your screen at, say, 50% resolution.  Let's say this document is intended to contain very high quality gradients when it is output - not unlike what you might want for a fine art print.  Further, let's assume you've got adjustment layers and maybe feathered masks and maybe even some layer styles.

Photoshop combines the layers when at zoomed-out display sizes using a speed-optimized algorithm, which is actually working on downsized preview images (called Cache Levels) so as to get your display updated as quickly as possible. 

When zoomed-out, the display is necessarily degraded because the layer combination is being done at a low bit depth. 

Not only that, but Layer Styles are being approximated as well.  You've heard the advice to only evaluate effects at 100% zoom, right?

Here's a 16 bits/channel PSD file which uses adjustment layers to show the issue very clearly.  Open it in Photoshop, zoom it out to 50% or smaller and notice the difference from what you see at higher zoom values.

http://Noel.ProDigitalSoftware.com/ForumPosts/LayerCombinationTestDocument.psd

-Noel

[Hudechrome]

Ok, I see the difference. It's dramatic, far more than I ever see.

But wait! There's more!

What is linear srgb? It's not in my Color Settings choices and the difference when zooming is huge, depending on

whether you have converted or not.

[Noel Carboni]

That's a linear profile of my own creation - basically an sRGB profile with a gamma of 1.0 instead of 2.2.  I find it useful for testing and astroimage work, among other things.

It happens to enhance the differences but the concepts still apply even when using one of the more typical document profiles.

-Noel

[Hudechrome]

Depends on how one defines needs. If needs are based on current practice, yes more isn't better. If needs are based on where the technology is likely to go, well then, more may be the only option. That is, of course also from the supplier perspective vs user. I want a system that I don't have to replace each time technology changes. From Apple's POV, they want you to buy new each time.

BTW a good piece of test software for panels is the eizo-test. I found it at www.prad.de. One peculiar or rather unexpected outcome was the native resolution of the Del 2412. Recommended resolution is 1920x1200 px. Native according to the eizo is 1200x800.

[Noel Carboni]

Hudechrome wrote:

One peculiar or rather unexpected outcome was the native resolution of the Del 2412. Recommended resolution is 1920x1200 px. Native according to the eizo is 1200x800.

I find it impossible to believe that a monitor being advertised as having 1920 x 1200 pixels doesn't actually have that actual count of discrete pixels.  I suggest that the Eizo software must be in error.

-Noel

[Hudechrome]

I probably should go ask them. It does generate a certain distrust in the overall test.

But printers also have an advertised dot that is some multiple of the native The native dot size of the 3800 is 720x720 dpi but you can run it at 2880x1440. That is if you believe Epson. But another person who made a study of the Epson 2200 dot patterns has much to say about it.

http://www.rags-int-inc.com/

Click on the Technology button and scroll down to printers.

This is OT  but yet apropos the overall concept.

[asmil-m]

EIZO HIGH END monitors test - a good piece of test software for panels is the eizo-test.I found it at www.prad.de.

http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/testsoftware/eizo-monitor-test.html

asmil

[gggmmm]

still not working

i now have the following setup:

- 10 bit monitor: quato 240 LED, hardware calibrated

- 10 bit graphics-card: nvidia quadro 600 with "force 10 bits per component" enabled in the driver

- PS CS 6 with "30 bit display" enabled in the advanced graphics processor settings

- win 7 64 with aero disabled

and the testramp still shows banding.

am i missing something?

[Chris Cox]

At that point you need to work with NVidia to see what is going wrong between their driver and your display.

[mdb-at]

I wanted to make this setup.

How Nivida solved the problem with quadro 600.

Should I buy a other videocard?

Tank's for help.

[Chris Cox]

On Windows, both companies have it working pretty well with Photoshop CS6.

On MacOS, it is still not possible because Apple has created the necessary APIs.

[gggmmm]

my very frustrating experience so far: it doesn't work, but it's no ones fault

--------

my setup:

- 10 bit monitor: Quato Intelli Proof 240 LED excellence, hardware calibrated, getting signal via displayport

- 10 bit graphics-card: nvidia quadro 600

- PS CS 6 with "30 bit display" enabled in the advanced graphics processor settings

- win 7 64 with aero disabled

--------

in this forum chris cox says, that ps outputs 10 bits.

other posts in this forum say, that it works with win 7.

support at PNY (which is the manufacturer of my quadro600-card) is telling me, that quadro 600 works on their test setup with a NEC monitor. they don't know why it doesn't work for me. their support is very friendly and can be called on the phone. they seem to care and are in contact with nvidia, but i didn't get any results yet (3 weeks).

support at Quato tells me that 10 bit isn't working with Win 7. which contradicts experiences i this forum and this post from an NEC-emlployee: http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/07/guest-blog-understanding-10-bit-color.html. their support is also friendly and can be reached by phone.

so the only company i haven't contacted yet is microsoft, which i also don't want to try as that's probably wasted energy and  it seems not to be the problem anyway.

i will also send a link to this post to all the companies involved.

so mdb-at i wouldnt recommend my setup. but who knows, it might work on your machine.

[Chris Cox]

Double check and make sure you have 10 bit display enabled in Photoshop's advanced GPU preferences, and that "DeepColor" is enabled in the NVidia controls.

After that, NVidia are the only ones who could troubleshoot it and figure out why the driver isn't reporting 10 bit capability, or getting the data out to the display.

[gggmmm]