Does CO 20 support 30 Bit Workflow?
I found an older thread about this - 2 years ago CO apparently didn't.
But now we have CO 20! Does CO 20 support a 30 bit workflow (10 bit per color channel) from the software to the monitor?
-
Hello Team,
I second the question.
Thanks,
Robert
0 -
Nobody who knows this?
0 -
This is a simple "yes" or "no" question. Does ist really take more than 3 weeks to answer it?
Thanks,
Lutz
0 -
Lutz, there are not so many release notes during the last 2 years, also relatively simple to find them.
Once your post moves lower in the rank in this user to user forum, only a few will look at it, and probably not many here in the forum who could give a definite answer and hence might not want to reply.
Here's my answer: I don't think so.
You can submit a request via the top most link to contact C1.
0 -
Oh sorry, I didn't know that this is solely a user-to-user forum, I thought that C1 stuff is reading and giving answers here as well.
Thanks for the hint, I will submit a request to C1 through the link. Would be a pity if C1 doesn't support 30 bit workflow.
Regards, Lutz
0 -
Lutz,
Do you currently have a working 30 bit workflow? Would be interested which hard and software is involved.
regards
0 -
Hi BeO,
I asked this question for a friend who established a 30 bit workflow on his system and is now looking for a raw processing software that supports this workflow.
I asked him now about the details and he uses the following equipment:
CPU: HexaCore Intel Core i7-6800K
RAM: 128 GB
GPU: Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 with TM104(!) and 6GB GDDR6 [usually RTX 2060 uses the smaller GPU TM106 but this model has the more powerful GPU TM104 that is also used in the RTX 2070]
Monitor: NEC MultiSync PA311D (via DisplayPort) at 4096px * 2160px (149ppi), Settings: AdobeRGB, D65 (6500K), 160cd
OS: Windows 10 Enterprise 1809 x64
GPU driver: Nvidia Studio driver standard, current version 442.92
desktop colordepth: 32 Bit, output colordepth: 10 bpc, dynamic range: full (no limiting)We both think that it would be kind of sad if CO 20 doesn't support a 30 bit workflow. In the professional range 30 bit workflows are quite common. PO/CO adresses professionals, therefor it should support a 30 bit workflow as well. Photoshop supports it since CS6 in 2012 (!!!) .....
0 -
Hi Lutz,
until now I didn't realize that NVIDIA cards outside the Quadro line supports 10 bit, but the card of your friend does, according some internet articles. However it is quite possible that C1 does not make use of OpenGL, but maybe I am wrong and for final output to monitor it does.
I am assuming that C1 tranforms the internal 16bit representation of a color channel to 8 bit, performing some kind of dithering to avoid posterization, when outputting to monitor. It's my assumption only, though.
Here's my opion regarding your friend's situation and "perceived" dilemma, but that's really just my personal opinion, don't get me wrong.
Image software for professionals
C1 indeed is used by professionals, photographers and retouchers as part of their workflow.
Telling any professionbal using C1 that they are not using a professional software because it does not support sending 10bit images to the monitor is somehow obscure.
What is the benefit of 10bit. Color accuracy which can be perceived by human eye? Probably not. Even the smallest change in white balance has a higher impact on colors.
Avoiding posterization on the monitor in gradient-like parts of an image? (We are not dealing with artificial gradients often done in graphic design software like PS). I can't remember having seen this in C1 if the image is a raw file (though I tend to forget bad stuff very easily... :-)
It can happen if the 16 bit worflow was disrupted, outside of C1.In my opinion there are huge differences in the final image depending on the raw converter used, let alone the editing experience, so the choice of raw converter is impacting the final image, whereas a 10bit monitor display may potentially affect a small number of images, and only for display within that application (C1 or PS), not after exporting to a 8bit web image (jpg) or print.
In my opinion, declaring the 10 bit capability as the holy grail in photography software, especially raw converters is leading you into the wrong direction. It is the very least important selection criteria, imo. It shouldn't be a selection criteria at all, as it distracts you from important criteria.
As far as image quality and editing experience is concerned, compare and jugde the image quality of your output and the editing experience during editing, with real photographs, with different raw converters.
If that coincidentally correlates with a full 10 bit workflow for monitor output from within that software, take it as a nice additional benefit. In other words, re-evaluate your priorities.
(irony mode on)
I've bought a super modern steam cooker. Now I am eating my meals cooked with this steam cooker. It is very healthy, and everybody told me that's the best way to prepare my meals. I don't like the taste, but hey, I am convinced, and everybody tells me that's the best way to cook.
(irony mode off)Your and your friends milage may vary, and there might be good reasons for it. As I said, this is just my personal opinion, please don't think I want to offend anybody.
Final word: Though I don't think it is very necessary, it would not hurt either if C1 would support 10 bit monitor output (unless it tricks you to show nice gradients whereas in the jpg for web images this wouldn't be the case).
Cheers,
BeO
0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
8 Kommentare