Digital BW, The Print

How many shades of gray is a religious issue, so I'm not going to 
address that.

I will say that how many shades of gray you have to print isn't the most 
interesting thing. What is most interesting is how many you have to 
manipulate in an image editor. If you do much editing at all, such as 
applying a contrast adjustment curve, having more bits gives the 
software more to work with, and often results in smoother tones, and 
less chance of posterization.

With most manipulations, you end up with fewer individual shades of gray 
than you started with. If you start with exacly the number you need, 
then you end with less than you need. And *that* is why more shades of 
gray is better than fewer shades of gray, IMHO.
--
Bruce Watson



Seth wrote:

> I really must differ on that.
>
>Since B&W film printing is based on the premise that there are 128 shades of
>grey plus black and white (and your 150 shades certainly fits there), 256
>shades is certainly adequate.
>
>If we stay away from those that want to use a loupe, or look at a 16x20 from
>6" away, we surely accomplish with 256 what was done by the old masters with
>130 shades.
>
>Seth
>
>==-----Original Message-----
>==Behalf Of Martin Sluka
>==
>==Humans recognize about 150 different greys. But problem is, 
>==they recognize them on full picture and on small detail too. So 8 bits
>==(256 greys) is not enough for smooth BW picture.
>==
>==> In short, the view was that while 16 would be better, 12 was ok.
>
>  
>