• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

PS CS5 10-bit video under Open GL on Mac OS??

New Here ,
Oct 11, 2010 Oct 11, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Dear Adobe:

I have been working with the engineers at Eizo for the past year in trying to get the Eizo CG 243w monitor to work at 10-bits per color plane via mini displayport to displayport connection while using the 4870 graphics card on a Mac Pro.

Eizo re-wrote the firmware for the CG 243w to be compatible with the mini displayport standard released by Apple. As of this past summer, the CG 243w now interconnects with the 4870 graphics card to the monitor, while hosted on a Mac Pro under 10.6.

BUT in using Adobe's on test image, it is obvious that the display is still not working at 10-bits per color plane, as banding is showing.

Would you please clearly state whether Adobe Photoshop CS5 in the current version is capable of driving the 4870 graphics card and displaying 10-bits per color plane images using the MacPro and current OS? We need to know where the bottleneck is coming from---Adobe, Apple, AMD.

It is frustrating that Windows users have successfully been able to use Photoshop CS5 with a handful of different graphics cards and a large number of Eizo 10-bit monitors for a long time and it still appears that Mac users, known for being graphic intensive, cannot. We really need help getting to the bottom of this. Adobe Labs might be cranking out some fun new product, but functionality of a key issue for Photoshop would seem to be higher priority---and 10-bits per color plane seems like it would be one such issue.

cheers,

Pete

Views

45.2K

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe
replies 113 Replies 113
LEGEND ,
Sep 18, 2011 Sep 18, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Just to add to the conversation. The NEC Wide Gamut LCD monitors holds a 10 bit LUT internally in the monitor to return a solid 8 bit video data to the video card. You will not see banding.

I’ve got a NEC PA271W hooked up as I believe you describe and still see banding using the ‘test file’ provided here: http://www.amd.com/us/products/workstation/graphics/software/Pages/adobe-photoshop.aspx (ramp.psd).

I’d sure like to know what the solution is, if any to use this file to prove (if it does indeed prove) I have a full 10-bit path.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Sep 18, 2011 Sep 18, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

A 10 bit LUT does not mean a 10 bit display path. A 10 bit LUT just improves (slightly) the 8 bit display path if you had any gamma corrections applied in the display.

And that is not relevant to the 10 bit display path being discussed in this topic -- which would require 10 bit/channel framebuffers in the video card and drivers (Apple's drivers being the missing component at this time).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Oct 29, 2011 Oct 29, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What is the current situation?

Does Photoshop supports 10-bit output in OSX?

If still not, looks like there is some misleading articles(from 2010? CS4?) around...

http://nativedigital.co.uk/site/2010/11/10-bit-graphics-on-apple-mac/

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Oct 29, 2011 Oct 29, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

Please read the existing posts in this topic.

Photoshop supports 10bit/channel framebuffers. But MacOS X does not suport 10bit/channel framebuffers, so Photoshop can't use it on MacOS.

Apple still has 10 bit/channel framebuffer support on their "Nice to have, eventually" list.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Banding? are you using Spectraview II software? I will try that file on my system to confirm.

Chris is correct that there is no way to create the 10-bit path at his time. The clean 8-bits from the monitor (NEC only with Spectraview software and puck) should give 255 levels per channel.

The Spectraview software does alllow other devices to connect but I can not say if that is a factor.  We use the OEM X-rite puck with this setup.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Opened the file "ramp.psd" and see the individual "bars" of different densities but I do not believe I see banding.

The file appears to be bands of different neutral densities.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Well, those “bars" are what is referred to as banding here.

The bars show that only 256 levels are displayed while the 16-bit file actually has a multiple of that. You can verify this by moving in the minimum and maximum slider in the Photoshop curves so that you get a much steeper linear gradient (say, from in 32/out 0 to in 159/out 255). Then you will notice that the bars shrink in width (half as wide in the numerical example above) but the tonal difference between adjacent bars does not increase. In an 8-bit file the bars would stay the same width as before, and the tonal difference would become more apparent.

If you had true 10-bit output on your display, the bars would still be there, but only at a quarter of the width, and the tonal difference between them would be only a quarter of what you see now and thus hardly perceivable to the human eye.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Barry Rudick wrote:

Opened the file "ramp.psd" and see the individual "bars" of different densities but I do not believe I see banding.

That’s the banding! And I see it too on the SpectraView II using all the setup steps you describe. So no, while the NEC Wide Gamut LCD monitors holds a 10 bit LUT internally in the monitor You will see banding on a Mac until presumably Apple fixes the bottleneck here (some say drivers for specific video cards if I’m reading them correctly).

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Andrew wrote:

"That’s the banding!"

I see. If I make a black to white gradient I see no banding. Is that different than the ramp.psd? I guess so but I can not explain the diff.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Correction:

Dragging the gradient tool past the edge of the window shows definite banding. I would guess that the monitor profile throws some bits out?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Interesting test.

Create 32 bit new file. Drag gradient. Change mode to 16 bit using "Exposure, Gamma" default, add 0.5 monochromatic, gaussian noise and no banding.

This is very similar to how Live Picture rendered the built-out tiffs. All files rendered had 0.5% noise added. Similar to the 16 bit to 8 bit mode change in Photoshop.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Barry, none of this solves the big issue and questions in the posts; a full high bit path for all images in Photoshop (and hopefully other products like Lightroom). What appears to be the issue is Apple needing to further support something in the path. We have high bit panels. That’s helpful but not the same as having an entire high bit path. We have high bit cards (presumably the drivers are the issues or something to do with Apple, that isn’t clear to me). We have applications that can access the data (not the same as a high bit file support although that’s necessary too). The ramp.psd file supplied is one that attempts to empirically prove when the entire path is high bit due to no visible banding.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Banding in 8-bit rendering is most obvious if the gradient is soft enough for the threshold from one tonal level to the next to stretch across several pixels because you then get those bands of pixels with identical values and an abrupt edge at the threshold. Of course, you can cover up banding with dithering or by adding noise. But that is not the point of the ramp.psd test picture cited earlier or having 10-bit video. 10-bit video can help you  tell apart banding inherent in an image file from banding that is just introduced due to limiting output to 8 bits per channel (or less, as in a profiled monitor where tonal steps may be lost unless a higher bit-depth LUT is available and accessible for hardware calibration of the monitor).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Sep 19, 2011 Sep 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The reason why I suspect so many want a full 10-bit path on wide gamut displays dates back to a 2004 post by Karl Lang, the fellow who designed PressView and Sony Artisan.

1) A wide gamut LCD display is not a good thing for most (95%) of high

end users. The data that leaves your graphic card and travels over the

DVI cable is 8 bit per component. You can't change this. The OS, ICC

CMMs, the graphic card, the DVI spec, and Photoshop will all have to be

upgraded before this will change and that's going to take a while. What

does this mean to you? It means that when you send RGB data to a wide

gamut display the colorimetric distance between any two colors is much

larger. As an example, lets say you have two adjacent color patches one

is 230,240,200 and the patch next to it is 230,241,200. On a standard

LCD or CRT those two colors may be around .8 Delta E apart. On an Adobe

RGB display those colors might be 2 Delta E apart on an ECI RGB display

this could be as high as 4 delta E.

It's very nice to be able to display all kinds of saturated colors you

may never use in your photographs, however if the smallest visible

adjustment you can make to a skin tone is 4 delta E you will become

very frustrated very quickly.

2) More bits in the display does not fix this problem. 10 bit LUTs, 14

Bit 3D LUTs, 10 bit column drivers, time-domain bits, none of these

technologies will solve problem 1. Until the path from photoshop to the

pixel is at least 10 bits the whole way, I advise sticking to a display

with something close to ColorMatch or sRGB.

3) Unless the display has "TRUE 10 bit or greater 1D LUTs that are

8-10-10" user front panel controls for color temp, blacklevel and gamma

are useless for calibration and can in fact make things worse. An

8-10-8 3D LUT will not hurt things and can help achieve a fixed

contrast ratio which is a good thing.

Only Mitsubishi/NEC displays with "GammaComp" have 8-10-8 3D LUTs at

this time. Some Samsung displays may have this I don't test many of

their panels as the performance in other areas has been lacking.

Only the Eizo 210, 220 and NEC2180WG have 8-10-10 paths. If you really

want to know... the path in the Eizo is "8-14bit3D-8-10bit1D-10" go

figure that one out 😉 The 2180WG has an actual 10 bit DVI interface

with a 10-10-10 path but nothing supports it so you can't use it yet -

but for $6500 your ready when it does 😉

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines