Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: Roscolo on February 23, 2019, 01:43:04 pm
-
A lot of my work involves repro of paintings. Always looking to improve. Building a new PC workstation now. My monitor is NEC PA271Q which apparently is a true 10bit monitor. So, looking at Nvidia graphics cards I had just planned on getting something a GTX or RTX card in the $250 - $400 range. But now I'm thinking since the monitor supports true 10bit, maybe an Nvidia Quadro card is worth it. Would prefer to spend not more than $500 on the card, so looks like the Quadro P2000 would be the card of choice.
My workflow now is pretty good with an old GTX 560ti and NEC PA272W on this current workstation. Most of my work is done in Photoshop. Friends have me looking at Capture One, so I may add that this year.
Always looking for anything that gets me from start of a print to a perfect match with as little time and proofing as possible.
10bit workflow worth it? Quadro P2000 a good choice?
-
Building a new PC workstation now. My monitor is NEC PA271Q which apparently is a true 10bit monitor...
...
Always looking for anything that gets me from start of a print to a perfect match with as little time and proofing as possible.
10bit workflow worth it? Quadro P2000 a good choice?
Since I am mostly into BW photography for me the upgrade to the same monitor as yours (PA271Q) and a 10bit video card was HEAVEN! Prior to this upgrade the actual banding I would get in PS on my otherwise smooth transitions was atrocious and would constantly get me distracted and frustrated.
On 10bits display all became buttery smooth. I am not rocking a Nvidia cause I've found it too expensive but a AMD FirePro W7100 which I managed to get for a very good price from a local "eBay" style online shop.
I guess if P2000 would be equally good for PS if you're fine with it's 3D performance. Else, yeah 10bits it is a really enjoyable and useful upgrade. BTW... The NEC PA271Q is a gem! I just love it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Open this document in Photoshop at 100%. On a fully high bit display path, you'll see zero banding. You may see some, and then the question would be, is it really an issue?
http://digitaldog.net/files/10-bit-test-ramp.zip (http://digitaldog.net/files/10-bit-test-ramp.zip)
-
Open this document in Photoshop at 100%. On a fully high bit display path, you'll see zero banding. You may see some, and then the question would be, is it really an issue?
http://digitaldog.net/files/10-bit-test-ramp.zip (http://digitaldog.net/files/10-bit-test-ramp.zip)
Wow. Thank you. So opening that file and looking at it on my current workstation (Windows 10, GTX 560ti, calibrated NEC PAC272W) the banding in that image is quite obvious and pronounced by my standards. So with a Quadro P2000 and the (I think) true 10bit NEC PA271Q, and with 10bit color enabled, that test image will be completely smooth and no visible banding?
I was going to spend $250-$400 on a GTX or RTX card anyway. May as well fork out an extra $40-$50 for the Quadro P2000. Had no idea it could make such a dramatic difference. I suppose I just need to confirm that the PA271Q is true 10bit, not dithered.
Anyone know of any appreciable downside to the Quadro P2000 vs one of the newer GTX, RTX consumer cards?
-
So with a Quadro P2000 and the (I think) true 10bit NEC PA271Q, and with 10bit color enabled, that test image will be completely smooth and no visible banding?
Absolutely no banding, guaranteed!
I suppose I just need to confirm that the PA271Q is true 10bit, not dithered.
Absolutely 10 bits, hardware, native, no dithering, 3D LUTs and other goodies!
Anyone know of any appreciable downside to the Quadro P2000 vs one of the newer GTX, RTX consumer cards?
Older card, inferior 3D by a large margin, not gamers oriented, yet providing enough performance for PS needs. But being a Quadro is the only chance one would get 10Bits display in Photoshop via specific OpenGL libraries. Not to be confused with desktop 10 Bits display that one can get with any decent video card.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I wouldn’t waste the money on a Quadro just for the 10bit capabilities because all GTX1080, 1070, 1060 and I think the 1050 cards are also 10bit native cards. I’ve got a GTX1080 and and a Dell 3014 monitor and both are 10bit native devices. I’ve yet to view Andrew’s 10bit test file but the benefit of a Quadro is the 3D application specific drivers. I don’t believe that a Quadro would offer any benefit as far as 2D/Photoshop is concerned and would likely be quite a bit poorer in performance compared to the GTX10x0 and certainly the newer RTX cards.
I calibrate and profile my monitor using DisplayCal and check the gpu LUTs and they are, as expected, untouched and all calibration takes place in the monitor LUTs. I shall take a look at the 10bit test file and see if there is any banding on my setup. I’d recommend you look at the GTX1070 range of cards as there would also be no performance gains to be had in Ps if using the RTX cards. For sure in gaming and 3D there will be an increase in performance from the RTX cards but I very much doubt that there would be anything to be gained as far as Ps is concerned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Well, now I see why the clamor from pretty much everyone for Nvidia to add / enable true 10bit color over OpenGL (photoshop) on their mainstream gaming cards. Looks like it's a Quadro P2000 or I may splurge / seek a deal on the P4000. Would be nice to put a second GTX or RTX card in this machine for the occasional game, but it seems that absolutely is not an option unless you dual-boot. So, boot into one OS for work...and boot into another OS for play. I'm no stranger to dual-booting so maybe that is what I will do. In any event the work takes priority.
-
I wouldn’t waste the money on a Quadro just for the 10bit capabilities because all GTX1080, 1070, 1060 and I think the 1050 cards are also 10bit native cards. I’ve got a GTX1080 and and a Dell 3014 monitor and both are 10bit native devices. I’ve yet to view Andrew’s 10bit test file but the benefit of a Quadro is the 3D application specific drivers. I don’t believe that a Quadro would offer any benefit as far as 2D/Photoshop is concerned and would likely be quite a bit poorer in performance compared to the GTX10x0 and certainly the newer RTX cards.
I calibrate and profile my monitor using DisplayCal and check the gpu LUTs and they are, as expected, untouched and all calibration takes place in the monitor LUTs. I shall take a look at the 10bit test file and see if there is any banding on my setup. I’d recommend you look at the GTX1070 range of cards as there would also be no performance gains to be had in Ps if using the RTX cards. For sure in gaming and 3D there will be an increase in performance from the RTX cards but I very much doubt that there would be anything to be gained as far as Ps is concerned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I probably agree with you, but most of my work is photo printing / art repro for very critical clients. I would be spending around $175 - $350 on a GTX 1060, 1070 anyway. Spending $450 on a Quadro P2000 just not a significant difference, although I appreciate the note about the performance hit. Really sucks that one cannot install and use both a Quadro and a GTX in the same system...at least not using the Quadro's 10bit OpenGL (photoshop) capability. For so much of my work (repro of paintings) I've got a good workflow now. Any slight edge to get me from proof to finished print a little faster is worth dropping a couple hundred bucks. Actually even a lot more, but I'm pretty covered with scanning, capture, printers, monitors, calibration, profiling and viewing station. Didn't even realize the PA271Q was true 10 bit until after I bought it for the new workstation. Was going to get a PA272W like the one I have now, but it's discontinued. That 10 bit workflow is probably one of the only improvements I can make at this point. Seeing those bands in that test image was an eye opening for me. I can spend $450 - $900 and make that go away? Take my money! :)
Please let me know what you see when you view that test image in Photoshop on your system. Some of this comes down to what we do, how critical the work is. Thank you.
-
Best hardware recommendations are always found at Puget Systems who do custom builds. For Photoshop, the recommendations are HERE. (https://www.pugetsystems.com/recommended/Recommended-Systems-for-Adobe-Photoshop-CC-139/Hardware-Recommendations) If you do your own computer build, this is always a good resource for hardware. A Quadro card may be of assistance with the right monitor. However, I'm not sure Lightroom supports 10 bit video at this point so it's not worth it if 95% of your work is in LR as opposed to PS.
-
Wow. Thank you. So opening that file and looking at it on my current workstation (Windows 10, GTX 560ti, calibrated NEC PAC272W) the banding in that image is quite obvious and pronounced by my standards. So with a Quadro P2000 and the (I think) true 10bit NEC PA271Q, and with 10bit color enabled, that test image will be completely smooth and no visible banding?
For a full high bit path, the OS, application, display and video card all need high bit support. So it depends. But for a modern version of Photoshop and Mac or Windows, and the other items supporting high bit, there should be no visible banding.
-
I wouldn’t waste the money on a Quadro just for the 10bit capabilities because all GTX1080, 1070, 1060 and I think the 1050 cards are also 10bit native cards. I’ve got a GTX1080 and and a Dell 3014 monitor and both are 10bit native devices. I’ve yet to view Andrew’s 10bit test file but the benefit of a Quadro is the 3D application specific drivers. I don’t believe that a Quadro would offer any benefit as far as 2D/Photoshop is concerned and would likely be quite a bit poorer in performance compared to the GTX10x0 and certainly the newer RTX cards.
I calibrate and profile my monitor using DisplayCal and check the gpu LUTs and they are, as expected, untouched and all calibration takes place in the monitor LUTs. I shall take a look at the 10bit test file and see if there is any banding on my setup. I’d recommend you look at the GTX1070 range of cards as there would also be no performance gains to be had in Ps if using the RTX cards. For sure in gaming and 3D there will be an increase in performance from the RTX cards but I very much doubt that there would be anything to be gained as far as Ps is concerned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok. In short sorry to trouble your firm opinion but you're wrong. Only Quadro and FirePro cards will support and enable 10 bits display in Photoshop. No other. Absolutely none. End of story. I PS settings is called 30bits support (10bits per each RGB channel) and only available for those with Quadro or FirePro cards.
You're confusing desktop 10bits display via DirectX with the PS OpenGL 10bits acceleratation. A common and forgivable mistake, though.
-
Best hardware recommendations are always found at Puget Systems who do custom builds. For Photoshop, the recommendations are HERE. (https://www.pugetsystems.com/recommended/Recommended-Systems-for-Adobe-Photoshop-CC-139/Hardware-Recommendations) If you do your own computer build, this is always a good resource for hardware. A Quadro card may be of assistance with the right monitor. However, I'm not sure Lightroom supports 10 bit video at this point so it's not worth it if 95% of your work is in LR as opposed to PS.
+1
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I’m not confusing either setting, I’m quite familiar with both settings you’re referring to. If the GTX1070 wasn’t actually capable of displaying in 10/30bit, why then would Ps give me the option to enable the 30bit setting if the card couldn’t actually display at said bit depth? I can take a screenshot if it’ll make you happy but I’m not confused. I may be wrong, sure, but if I am then Ps is wrong too. Also, how would it be possible that the desktop could be displayed in 10bits but not the Ps workspace? Doesn’t really make sense but maybe you know something I don’t. If you could elaborate and explain how and why the desktop is able to be displayed in 10bits and Ps gives the option of ticking the 30bits setting in the preferences, I’d be quite interested to know how this is not actually 30bits.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I’m not confusing either setting, I’m quite familiar with both settings you’re referring to. If the GTX1070 wasn’t actually capable of displaying in 10/30bit, why then would Ps give me the option to enable the 30bit setting if the card couldn’t actually display at said bit depth? I can take a screenshot if it’ll make you happy but I’m not confused. I may be wrong, sure, but if I am then Ps is wrong too. Also, how would it be possible that the desktop could be displayed in 10bits but not the Ps workspace? Doesn’t really make sense but maybe you know something I don’t. If you could elaborate and explain how and why the desktop is able to be displayed in 10bits and Ps gives the option of ticking the 30bits setting in the preferences, I’d be quite interested to know how this is not actually 30bits.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok. Then I am sorry for "you're confused"... You're wrong! :))
Yes, the PS would show the option, allow you to select it but... it's lying! Try with the file digital dog proposed and you'll see banding. Other way to actually confirm there's no 10bits for you is to dig into the logs PS offers in Photoshop, select Help > System Info. End of lies! ;)
I am running a dual video card system, GTX 1080 Ti FE and the FirePro W7100, both hooked up to the same NEC. Trust me when real 10bits gets enabled for the FirePro, switching to the other port where the GTX is hooked would make PS crush, thus proving the 10bits on GTX is ... not there!
Again common and forgivable mistake... yet a msitake (pun intended)!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Hmmm, if that’s the case then I’ve changed my mind; go for the Quadro. I still don’t understand though, why would the GTX cards say they’re 10bit capable and Ps allows the 30bit setting to be enabled if the cards can’t actually display at that bit depth. Is this just another bug which Adobe needs to fix or is there something else going on? I’m curious now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Hmmm, if that’s the case then I’ve changed my mind; go for the Quadro. I still don’t understand though, why would the GTX cards say they’re 10bit capable and Ps allows the 30bit setting to be enabled if the cards can’t actually display at that bit depth. Is this just another bug which Adobe needs to fix or is there something else going on? I’m curious now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A rather old misery of Adobe, confusing and frustrating users for some 5-6 years already...
Referring back to Pugget Systems, as per Alan Goldhammer hint:
How to enable 30 bit in Photoshop (https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/How-to-enable-30-bit-in-Photoshop-1243/)
You will need to also have a workstation class graphics card (AMD Radeon Pro / Nvidia Quadro) in your system, and connect to a 10-bit monitor using a DisplayPort cable connection.
-
Best hardware recommendations are always found at Puget Systems who do custom builds. For Photoshop, the recommendations are HERE. (https://www.pugetsystems.com/recommended/Recommended-Systems-for-Adobe-Photoshop-CC-139/Hardware-Recommendations) If you do your own computer build, this is always a good resource for hardware. A Quadro card may be of assistance with the right monitor. However, I'm not sure Lightroom supports 10 bit video at this point so it's not worth it if 95% of your work is in LR as opposed to PS.
Thanks for the link. I think I read Puget's recommendations when I got started building this workstation, but wasn't seriously pursuing 10bit workflow until after I had already purchased the PA271Q and realized it apparently is true 10 bit capable. Came here thinking I would not go Quadro, but viewing that test file that shows very obvious bands on my current set-up. I use PS all the time, and almost never use LR. Puget seems to verify that the for my circumstances and Photoshop, the Quadro is the way to go. With my luck within 6 months of my purchase Nvidia will add / enable 10bit color on their mainstream GPU's. :) Which would definitely be great and long overdue. Searching this topic I've found many people buying expensive, or older, cheaper workstation cards just for the 10bit OpenGL feature.
-
For a full high bit path, the OS, application, display and video card all need high bit support. So it depends. But for a modern version of Photoshop and Mac or Windows, and the other items supporting high bit, there should be no visible banding.
Hmmm. I'm seeing no banding on my iMac screen, but quite visible banding on the attached PA241W. As I use the NEC for all photo work, that's distressing. Is there something I got wrong, or has the PA241W passed it's prime?
PS - Good test, Andrew, even if disturbing my equilibrium!
-
Thanks for the link. I think I read Puget's recommendations when I got started building this workstation, but wasn't seriously pursuing 10bit workflow until after I had already purchased the PA271Q and realized it apparently is true 10 bit capable. Came here thinking I would not go Quadro, but viewing that test file that shows very obvious bands on my current set-up. I use PS all the time, and almost never use LR. Puget seems to verify that the for my circumstances and Photoshop, the Quadro is the way to go. With my luck within 6 months of my purchase Nvidia will add / enable 10bit color on their mainstream GPU's. :) Which would definitely be great and long overdue. Searching this topic I've found many people buying expensive, or older, cheaper workstation cards just for the 10bit OpenGL feature.
I think most games utilize DirectX and the game designers these days are adding more ray tracing graphics that require the new generation of NVIDIA GPUs. The RTX 2060-70 cards are now the state of the art (I'm still running an NVIDIA 960 on my work station). Gamers are concerned about frames per second on big monitors which we photographers generally are not (I've only played one game and that was because it was free with my graphics card purchase). It's too bad that everyone cannot agree to a common standard and OpenGL and DirectX are useful but for different purposes. I wouldn't hold my breath about NVIDIA coming around, their user base are the game players!!! Sales to that group dwarfs sales to photographers.
-
Hmmm. I'm seeing no banding on my iMac screen, but quite visible banding on the attached PA241W.
Should be the opposite and I believe that iMac is introducing dithering to 'hide' the true results.
-
Should be the opposite and I believe that iMac is introducing dithering to 'hide' the true results.
Here's something interesting. If I choose to mirror the displays (which I wouldn't normally do) the banding shows up on the iMac too!
If it is dithering that's rescuing the IMac display in normal dual screen use, then some component in the system is less than optimal.
The system report tells me I'm running "Radeon Pro 580 8192 MB graphics" card but I don't know how I'd tell whether it is "a 10-bit" card (can't find anything intelligible to me in that respect on the spec. sheet)
I've got the feeling I'm out of my (bit) depth!
-
Hmmm. I'm seeing no banding on my iMac screen, but quite visible banding on the attached PA241W.
Perhaps the iMac is dithering, while PA241W is not. The dithering adds noise which may cover up 8 bit quantization.
-
Here's something interesting. If I choose to mirror the displays (which I wouldn't normally do) the banding shows up on the iMac too!
If it is dithering that's rescuing the IMac display in normal dual screen use, then some component in the system is less than optimal.
The system report tells me I'm running "Radeon Pro 580 8192 MB graphics" card but I don't know how I'd tell whether it is "a 10-bit" card (can't find anything intelligible to me in that respect on the spec. sheet)
I've got the feeling I'm out of my (bit) depth!
For what this is worth (and I'm not confident it is) the system report alleges that both the iMac and the NEC are "30-bit color" which I take to mean 10 bits per channel.
But Andrew's test picture was supposed not to show banding in a 10-bit setup and it clearly does on the PA241W screen. I'm wondering now (5yrs in) whether I set it up incorrectly?
-
For what this is worth (and I'm not confident it is) the system report alleges that both the iMac and the NEC are "30-bit color" which I take to mean 10 bits per channel.
But Andrew's test picture was supposed not to show banding in a 10-bit setup and it clearly does on the PA241W screen. I'm wondering now (5yrs in) whether I set it up incorrectly?
Your report is what I'd expect to see for a high bit path.
You did examine the document at 100% (1:1) but still saw banding?
What connections are you using from the PA?
-
Your report is what I'd expect to see for a high bit path.
You did examine the document at 100% (1:1) but still saw banding?
What connections are you using from the PA?
Doh!
No. I was not looking at 100% :(
When I do, there is no banding!
Thanks Andrew. I thought I had been a muppet, but not quite that much! Sorry to have wasted everyone's time.
In my (partial ) defense when I slide the image from iMac to NEC it shows at 100% on the iMac and only 50% on the NEC. Likewise when I (now) look at 100% on the NEC and slide the image back to the iMac it now views at 200% presumably because of the different pixel densities.
(Edited to fix deadful spelling!)
-
I am looking at the Quadro lineup and there are many models in that group with big price variation. Are all of them 10bit? I cannot find any related information in their spec pages. For what should I look for?
All Quadro lineup, 2012 on (at least) are 10 bits enabled. Same for FirePro lineup.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
All Quadro lineup, 2012 on (at least) are 10 bits enabled. Same for FirePro lineup.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks.
-
A lot of my work involves repro of paintings. Always looking to improve. Building a new PC workstation now. My monitor is NEC PA271Q which apparently is a true 10bit monitor. So, looking at Nvidia graphics cards I had just planned on getting something a GTX or RTX card in the $250 - $400 range. But now I'm thinking since the monitor supports true 10bit
FYI:
Not sure if your screen actually has a ‘true’ 10bit display panel as the NEC Displays site states that actually their 10bit panels are in fact “8bit+FRC” (frame rate control) panel which means that it is essentially approximating a 10bit display as explained on the Puget Systems website. In short, if a pixel is supposed to be showing a value of 101 but can physically only show levels 100 and 104, then the panel will display level 100 for 75% of the time and level 104 for 25% of the time. It changes between these values fast enough to fool the human vision system so that we believe we’re seeing level 101 in much the same way as a bunch of still images shown at 24+fps will fool our vision system into believing that we’re seeing a movie/moving image.
NEC Display Solutions-Technologies (https://www.necdisplay.com/colorcritical/home/)
-
FYI:
Not sure if your screen actually has a ‘true’ 10bit display panel as the NEC Displays site states that actually their 10bit panels are in fact “8bit+FRC”
NEC Display Solutions-Technologies (https://www.necdisplay.com/colorcritical/home/)
I definitely need to confirm with NEC that the PA271Q is true 10bit, but NEC does say, "It features true 10-bit color with a 14-bit 3D LUT for impeccable accuracy and supports all professional color spaces..." so I'm guessing that means what it says.
https://www.necdisplay.com/about/press-release/nec-display-updates-popular-professional-desktop-d/797
-
Looking at the Quadro P2000 and the Quadro P4000, most folks getting a workstation card just for 10bit color in Photoshop seem to opt for the P2000 at about $300 less than the P4000.
Using the card essentially for that purpose, anyone with more knowledge of these cards know if the P4000 has any big advantage over the P2000? I see more CUDA cores, and the P2000 is 5GB RAM while the P4000 is 8GB RAM. Not sure if those specs add up to the P4000 having any big real world advantage.
-
I definitely need to confirm with NEC that the PA271Q is true 10bit, but NEC does say, "It features true 10-bit color with a 14-bit 3D LUT for impeccable accuracy and supports all professional color spaces..." so I'm guessing that means what it says.
https://www.necdisplay.com/about/press-release/nec-display-updates-popular-professional-desktop-d/797 (https://www.necdisplay.com/about/press-release/nec-display-updates-popular-professional-desktop-d/797)
It is a high bit panel. I own one.
And there's this:
-
I suppose it all depends on what one means when they state/say/claim a monitor is a ‘true’ 10bit display. IMHO an 8bit+FRC panel is not a true 10bit display/panel as it specifically states that it’s an 8bit panel. The fact that it uses FRC to dither or approximate a 10bit panel to me is not actually 10bit at all. True 10bit panels can physically display all 1024 levels individually at request. They don’t need to swap between two different levels fast enough to fool us into seeing a particular level. Eizo has a white paper about this very topic and the difference between panels which can physically display all 1024 levels individually and without swapping between two different levels to fool the eye. I’ll see if I can find it.
Either way, if a panel has to resort to using some sort of ‘trickery’ to allow us to see 10bit levels, in my books, that certainly isn’t a true 10bit display. Maybe NEC should call it a true 8bit panel which uses visual trickery to approximate a 10bit display? Because that’s what it actually is, and this is what NEC states on their own website, not from some review or someone’s opinion.
Just my 2c worth...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
There is no trickery AFAIK, and SpectraView's have provided a true high bit panel for many years.
-
There is no trickery AFAIK, and SpectraView's have provided a true high bit panel for many years.
How can you say that when NEC themselves state that the panel is actually an 8bit panel? The fact that it uses FRC to approximate a 10bit display also means that it in fact isn’t a 10bit panel. If it didn’t use FRC, would you say it’s still a 10bit display? Even though the panel is physically only an 8bit panel?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
How can you say that when NEC themselves state that the panel is actually an 8bit panel? The fact that it uses FRC to approximate a 10bit display also means that it in fact isn’t a 10bit panel. If it didn’t use FRC, would you say it’s still a 10bit display? Even though the panel is physically only an 8bit panel?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well I can ping the PM who posts here sometimes.
What panel states otherwise? The spec's state true 10 bit.
Unless they are doing dither tricks like Apple (and I don't think so because in the past, prior to Mac OS having high bit support, my test file showed tiny banding on older SpectraViews), now it's as smooth as a babies behind.
The test file is however absolutely smooth now. And that's what I think counts.
-
I know Eizo produces medical panels which have actual 12bit physically displayable panels. They’re greyscale panels but can actually display the full 4096 levels, individually and physically display each and every one. These displays don’t need to rely on any form of FRC or other type of trickery, dither, whatever one wants to call it when FRC is needed to approximate a higher bit depth. If a panel actually was truly whatever bit depth it claims to be then it obviously would not need to rely on anything to display those individual levels. Just the same as many cheapo screens are now only 6bit+FRC to claim that they’re an 8bit panel.
If a company themselves actually state in their own website (I’m referring to what NEC state on their site) that some display they sell is xbit+FRC, that there is the proof that the panel is not in fact truly a higher bit depth panel. If it were, it obviously wouldn’t have to rely on any form of frame rate control or other means of dithering or approximating a higher bit depth.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
https://www.nec-display-solutions.com/p/download/v/507125203e399847997f15cf322c1ef6/cp/Products/Shared/Brochures/Brochures_Desktop/PA-Series-Displays/PDF-PASeries.pdf?fn=PASeries.pdf (https://www.nec-display-solutions.com/p/download/v/507125203e399847997f15cf322c1ef6/cp/Products/Shared/Brochures/Brochures_Desktop/PA-Series-Displays/PDF-PASeries.pdf?fn=PASeries.pdf)
Pretty clear about this panel's bit depth and this is the previous generation of the PA271Q. Now maybe the 272W (which I also own) is a 'true, true' 10-bit panel and the replacement isn't but I kind of doubt it.
More importantly, there is no banding on the banding test file.
-
If a company themselves actually state in their own website (I’m referring to what NEC state on their site) that some display they sell is xbit+FRC, that there is the proof that the panel is not in fact truly a higher bit depth panel.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Indeed ... Some displays might be 8bit+FRC and PA271Q might not be part of that "some"! Are we ok with basic logic?
-
Well all the display makers of high bit output tell us their displays can produce billions of colors. That is of course rubbish if you understand the difference between numbers and colors.
Again, what matters is the utter lack of banding seen on-screen with a full high bit path (display, video card, OS, app) that isn't the case when one or more items isn't.
None of us can even see 16.7 million colors.
-
Looks like there may be a mix - perhaps it depends on the input used ?
From page 2 of the link, third paragraph.
"
The PA Series employs the latest 10-bit (or 8-bit + FRC) grayscale control and
processing electronics, which, when aligned with the wide colour gamut RGB
colour filters, allows over a billion individual colours to be displayed. This 10-bit
colour capability is best taken advantage of when using the latest DisplayPort
video connector, and 14-bit LUT to ensure smooth and graded colour and
grayscale spectral distributions.
Experience the very best in colour image quality with the latest generation of state
of the art 10-bit AH-IPS technology, with exceptionally wide viewing angle, widest
colour gamut available (108.6% AdobeRGB colour space) and absence of colour
shift. The true benefit of a wide colour gamut displays is particularly visible when
combined with a 10-bit panel, since potential colour banding or visible grayscale
steps are eliminated.
"
-
Are you better off with a 10-bit 2560x1600 display or a 8-bit 4K or 5K display?
-
There's no banding in color or gray; thats what counts. That was not always the case and that's what counts.
-
Are you better off with a 10-bit 2560x1600 display or a 8-bit 4K or 5K display?
No banding... Irrespective of resolution.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
No banding... Irrespective of resolution.
I have never noticed banding in images on my display until I downloaded that image which shows it. Am I just not critical enough?
-
I have never noticed banding in images on my display until I downloaded that image which shows it. Am I just not critical enough?
I wouldn't dare questioning your "critical" eye... For me it started organically: since I'm much into BW fineart my gradations were absolutely horrendous on my last Dell using GTX-1080ti, 8bit. I wasn't checking it mathematically but eventually the results were a major let down. And 1024 levels of gray vs 256... God, it shows!
-
I have never noticed banding in images on my display until I downloaded that image which shows it. Am I just not critical enough?
I'd say it is the least important attribute of a display system. And with a high bit panel, but without other high bit components like a video card, it's pretty minimal and you really need to consider the zoom ratio when editing as it can affect what appears as banding. Plus if you're working with high bit data, any banding you do see, you know is in the display path, not the image data.
Wide gamut, purity over the entire display; far, far more important attribute of the display. Ability to load calibrations in the panel and build multiple calibration targets; far more important.
Resolution (4K or more) I don't find at all useful and often, depending on UI scaling, a problem.
-
I use a MBP 2012 vintage retina and a EIZO CS240 A1998 gamut display. Viewing Andrews 10 bit gradient in Library LR mode I see lots of vertical banding. But viewing in Develop panel I see no banding on either screen. I doubt either of these screens are 10 bit displays, but could be wrong on that.
Maybe I'm just lucky.
-
Library and Develop use vastly different preview architecture. All modules except Develop are using JPEGs for one so what you reported sounds logical.
-
Looking at the Quadro P2000 and the Quadro P4000, most folks getting a workstation card just for 10bit color in Photoshop seem to opt for the P2000 at about $300 less than the P4000.
Using the card essentially for that purpose, anyone with more knowledge of these cards know if the P4000 has any big advantage over the P2000? I see more CUDA cores, and the P2000 is 5GB RAM while the P4000 is 8GB RAM. Not sure if those specs add up to the P4000 having any big real world advantage.
I wonder the same. From what I understand even the P400 which is the cheapest one supports 10 bit monitor output. Is it adequate?
-
I wonder the same. From what I understand even the P400 which is the cheapest one supports 10 bit monitor output. Is it adequate?
It could be fine though... There still needs to be some raw power to be used by PS for OpenGL acceleration.
From pure specifications perspective it's fine since it supports DP and high resolution and 10bits!(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190225/8d48cd1fa790d118332f44fdfde651ba.jpg)
-
I wonder the same. From what I understand even the P400 which is the cheapest one supports 10 bit monitor output. Is it adequate?
That would really depend on what you seem to be adequate. For example, if you’re running two 4k screens, and I’ve no idea of the P400’s specs, then if it has, say, just 1-2GB ram, it definitely wouldn’t be adequate as that isn’t enough ram to support two 4k screens, remembering that the amount of onboard ram required is determined purely by what resolution one is running. Another example could be the number of processing cores it has, nVidia calls them CUDA cores, might not be enough for smooth and responsive scrolling, zooming, moving the image around the Ps workspace and anything else which Ps expressly uses the gpu to carry out a particular function.
In the end, only you can determine what is adequate because what’s adequate performance for you might be absolutely dismal performance for someone else.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Thank you both for your replies. It starts to get clear.
-
For a full high bit path, the OS, application, display and video card all need high bit support. So it depends. But for a modern version of Photoshop and Mac or Windows, and the other items supporting high bit, there should be no visible banding.
Hi Andrew,
Could you please be so kind and share a screenshot of how the 10-bit-test-ramp should display correctly on an 10bit enabled driver in PS, please. I guess it would help the other fellows, including myself, what to expect.
Also, can you please download and run NEC's 10 bits DEMO (http://www.necdisplay.com/documents/Software/NEC_10_bit_video_Windows_demo.zip) and see if it works for you?
For me it throws an "ERROR: 10 bit video is either not supported, or not currently enabled on this video card." although I'm hooked to a AMD FireProW7100 with the same display as yours.
Thanks a lot.
-
Hi Andrew,
Could you please be so kind and share a screenshot of how the 10-bit-test-ramp should display correctly on an 10bit enabled driver in PS, please. I guess it would help the other fellows, including myself, what to expect.
Also, can you please download and run NEC's 10 bits DEMO (http://www.necdisplay.com/documents/Software/NEC_10_bit_video_Windows_demo.zip) and see if it works for you?
For me it throws an "ERROR: 10 bit video is either not supported, or not currently enabled on this video card." although I'm hooked to a AMD FireProW7100 with the same display as yours.
Thanks a lot.
Have you set up 10 bit display in the FirePro driver? How to do it seems to change every now and again with driver updates.
Dave
-
Have you set up 10 bit display in the FirePro driver? How to do it seems to change every now and again with driver updates.
Dave
Hi Dave,
In the FirePro settings (via right click on the desktop) I choose "Display" tab an select "Color Depth: 10bpc".
I know it's working cause otherwise the NEC will only show "RGB" in the info panel instead of "RGB 10 bit" as it currently shows.
But this is DirectX, desktop only settings... for PS settings, although set right I still have doubts is working correctly in 10bits... :( That's why I'm looking for someone with a similar setup I could cross check with.
-
Have you set up 10 bit display in the FirePro driver? How to do it seems to change every now and again with driver updates.
Dave
Waaaaaaaait a moment! I have just found out the secret of 10bits on FirePro and eventually enabled it:
You need to go to Advanced Settings (same right click on the desktop) and from there you need to enable "Enable 10-bit pixel format support".... So it looks like only this setting will enable the PS to use the 10 bpc, eventually.
Thank you AMD for confusing users, yet again! How stupid to have 2 similar settings that deal with the same setting in a different way!!!
-
Hi Andrew,
Could you please be so kind and share a screenshot of how the 10-bit-test-ramp should display correctly on an 10bit enabled driver in PS, please. I guess it would help the other fellows, including myself, what to expect.
Also, can you please download and run NEC's 10 bits DEMO (http://www.necdisplay.com/documents/Software/NEC_10_bit_video_Windows_demo.zip) and see if it works for you?
For me it throws an "ERROR: 10 bit video is either not supported, or not currently enabled on this video card." although I'm hooked to a AMD FireProW7100 with the same display as yours.
Thanks a lot.
Hi Andrew,
No need for testing anymore. I have managed to fix it myself. Thanks! ;)
-
I'd say it is the least important attribute of a display system. And with a high bit panel, but without other high bit components like a video card, it's pretty minimal and you really need to consider the zoom ratio when editing as it can affect what appears as banding. Plus if you're working with high bit data, any banding you do see, you know is in the display path, not the image data.
Wide gamut, purity over the entire display; far, far more important attribute of the display. Ability to load calibrations in the panel and build multiple calibration targets; far more important.
Resolution (4K or more) I don't find at all useful and often, depending on UI scaling, a problem.
I have a regular NVIDIA GPU with DirectX so I cannot run 10 bit off of it. My NEC monitor is a Spectraview but does not support native 10 bit even if I had a Quadro card. When I open Andrew's image in PS I do see banding but it's really quite faint. Since I mainly use LR the banding issue is really not that important for me.
-
I use Photoshop CS6 on a Mac and don't get the option to display in 10 bit. I'm hoping someone can tell me which part of my system is the problem. I use a 20113 MacPro running OS 10.13 with an AMD FirePro D300 graphics card, an NEC PA 272W monitor and CS6. In the system report it says the monitor supports 30 bit color so maybe that's not it. I'm under the impression that CS6 supports 10 bit display under Windows but maybe not on a Mac? Can anyone tell me where the limitation is in my system? Thanks.
-
I use Photoshop CS6 on a Mac and don't get the option to display in 10 bit. I'm hoping someone can tell me which part of my system is the problem. I use a 20113 MacPro running OS 10.13 with an AMD FirePro D300 graphics card, an NEC PA 272W monitor and CS6. In the system report it says the monitor supports 30 bit color so maybe that's not it. I'm under the impression that CS6 supports 10 bit display under Windows but maybe not on a Mac? Can anyone tell me where the limitation is in my system? Thanks.
https://www.slrlounge.com/10-bit-support-now-available-for-photoshop-cc-in-os-x/
I think that version is too old.
-
https://www.slrlounge.com/10-bit-support-now-available-for-photoshop-cc-in-os-x/
I think that version is too old.
Thanks Andrew, I wondered if that was the case. I've found directions for setting up CS6 to display 10 bit under Windows but never on a Mac. I've been holding off on signing up for CC because everything I need is in CS6 and then there's the subscription thing but maybe it's time to get on with it. At some point Apple is going to upgrade something and break CS6 anyway. Thanks again for your help.
-
Just for your information, the Mac app Preview in High Sierra is 10 bit enabled. At least with my NEC PA243W monitor and an Nvidia GTX 1050 ti video card I can view Andrew's test image in Preview with no banding. The monitor reports 10 bits when I turn it on.
Allan
-
Just for your information, the Mac app Preview in High Sierra is 10 bit enabled. At least with my NEC PA243W monitor and an Nvidia GTX 1050 ti video card I can view Andrew's test image in Preview with no banding. The monitor reports 10 bits when I turn it on.
Allan
Interesting, on Windows 10 the gtx 1050 only supports 10 bit with DirectX which is great for games but is not supported by Photoshop which requires OpenGL support. Does the mac realy have openGL 10 bit driver for Nvidia gaming cards?
Dave
-
Interesting, on Windows 10 the gtx 1050 only supports 10 bit with DirectX which is great for games but is not supported by Photoshop which requires OpenGL support. Does the mac realy have openGL 10 bit driver for Nvidia gaming cards?
Dave
I dare foresee the answer: NO! Since it's not about Apple / MacOS but about Adobe + Nvidia + AMD.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I’m not confusing either setting, I’m quite familiar with both settings you’re referring to. If the GTX1070 wasn’t actually capable of displaying in 10/30bit, why then would Ps give me the option to enable the 30bit setting if the card couldn’t actually display at said bit depth? I can take a screenshot if it’ll make you happy but I’m not confused. I may be wrong, sure, but if I am then Ps is wrong too. Also, how would it be possible that the desktop could be displayed in 10bits but not the Ps workspace? Doesn’t really make sense but maybe you know something I don’t. If you could elaborate and explain how and why the desktop is able to be displayed in 10bits and Ps gives the option of ticking the 30bits setting in the preferences, I’d be quite interested to know how this is not actually 30bits.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can enable it, sure, but it doesn't work, period. Trust me I have a 10 bit display and GTX 1070 and have tried a quadro. You need a quadro or the AMD equivalent to get 10 bits to the display.
Since you can't do a geforce ans a quadro together on the same system, does anybody have one of the pro AMD cards and an nvidia geforce on the same system with 10 bit from the AMD? Do they play OK together?
-
Since you can't do a geforce ans a quadro together on the same system, does anybody have one of the pro AMD cards and an nvidia geforce on the same system with 10 bit from the AMD? Do they play OK together?
GTX 1080Ti FE + AMD FirePro WX7100 here, on a desktop. They are playing very nice together except for the fact that I am not able to see anything on the FirePro until Windows loads up since the GTX is water-cooled (my gaming he) and cannot be physically moved from the initially assigned slot... and I haven't been able to find the right BIOS settings (if any is available!) to give boot VESA priority to the FirePro.
Else, 10 bits running buttery smooth for both desktop and PS.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Pulled the trigger on the Quadro P2000 from B&H for $425. Literally the next day Dell had the Quadro P2000 on sale for $100 less: $325! B&H wouldn't price match because Dell went out of stock quick, but was kind enough to just reroute the card and refund me. So I got the 10bit card and saved some $$$.
-
GTX 1080Ti FE + AMD FirePro W7100 here, on a desktop. They are playing very nice together except for the fact that I am not able to see anything on the FirePro until Windows loads up since the GTX is water-cooled (my gaming he) and cannot be physically moved from the initially assigned slot... and I haven't been able to find the right BIOS settings (if any is available!) to give boot VESA priority to the FirePro.
Else, 10 bits running buttery smooth for both desktop and PS.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks, that is good to hear. I will probably pick up a 5100, if I ever get my monitor issue resolved.
EDIT: Actually just ordered a Radeon Pro WX 7100
-
update. I got the AMD 7100 wx and it plays fine with the geforce card. and provides 30 bit color for the monitor and Photoshop.
thanls
-
update. I got the AMD 7100 wx and it plays fine with the geforce card. and provides 30 bit color for the monitor and Photoshop.
thanls
Glad it works for you! Though I am following your other thread with the monitor calibration issues and that is still not ok at all. I will comment there.
-
A good way to visually test whether you are actually getting a 10 bit end to end display is do this:
1. Create a special testing display profile with gamma set to 1.0 and enable it. This is important to do otherwise you can have a hard time distinguishing 8/10 bits. This will make your display look quite bright with little contrast wherever you are not color managing things. Ignore this during the test.
2. In Photoshop create and fill a long rectangular gradient from RGB 0,0,0 to 16,16,16 on a 16 bit mode new image. Set the Photoshop background to black or dark.
3. Assign it a gamma=1 profile. If you don't have one, create one in Photoshop by altering Adobe RGB to a custom gamma=1.
4. You will see 17 strong, vertical segments if your path is 8 bits anywhere. If 10 bits, you will see about 64, much narrower segments which may be barely noticeable.
In Photoshop settings select "desaturate colors" and make sure the % is set to 0. On Windows this causes internal paths to be 8 bits and you will see the display show the 17 vertical bars. Deselect to return to true 10 bit mode. I don't know whether Apple OSs differ with this selection.
I've attached an image to download with a gamma=1 profile attached you can use to skip steps 2 and 3.
-
I probably have to post in each forum, but perhaps I can get the answer here:
Question: If I add a AMD pro card for 10bit, would I be able to select my RTX in Lightroom or Photoshop as "working" card? I'm asking, as I want to get 10bit back, but wouldn't want to give up the super fast speed the RTX is delivering.
I know C1, probably uses both cards, not sure about Adobe products...
It's also still true I couldn't use a NV Pro card in combination with my RTX?
Thanks a lot!
-
New Nvidia (RTX, Titan) driver with 30-bit color support:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/studio-driver/ (https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/studio-driver/)
-
New Nvidia (RTX, Titan) driver with 30-bit color support:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/studio-driver/ (https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/studio-driver/)
I second this! I have installed it, properly configured it (double check desktop display is enabled to 10bits before PS OpenGL 10bits / any complains) and IT'S WORKING!