Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: 10 bit display  (Read 11645 times)

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
10 bit display
« on: November 01, 2015, 01:32:52 pm »

I am transitioning over to an Eizo CX241 display. My only requirement is 10-bit support for Adobe Photoshop CS6.

My current workstation consists of an Intel Core i7 first generation, Nvidia Geforce Gtx 660 2gb, Windows 7 pro OS. The Nvidia Geforce Gtx 660 2gb is compatible with the Eizo CX241, but the card will not support Open GL (10-bit display in PS6)

Any thoughts, ideas, or sage advice will be much appreciated.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2015, 03:43:40 pm by BobDavid »
Logged

TonyW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #1 on: November 01, 2015, 02:11:35 pm »

AFAIK the situation (at least for Windows) to enable full 10 bit support you will need to use either Quadro (nVidia) or FirePro (AMD) graphics cards.  The new iMacs appear to offer a 10 bit pipeline

It is possible to turn 10 bit on in th nVidia drivers but I believe this only applicable to Direct X apps.  I assume similar for AMD?

Truth is that both manufacturers appear to hobble their non workstation cards with purely a software limitation not hardware?

« Last Edit: November 01, 2015, 02:15:46 pm by TonyW »
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #2 on: November 01, 2015, 02:17:52 pm »

Logged

TonyW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2015, 02:38:16 pm »

Truth is I just do not know as I have never tested.

I wonder if the cheaper and newer K620  here would be equally as good

A comparison of current Quadro
http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/Quadro-desktop-gpu-specs-uk.html

A gut feeling to stay away from AMD equivalent at least for now as there seem to be issues and they don't appear to play well with Adobe
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2015, 02:45:42 pm »

Or maybe this: https://www.pny.com/NVIDIA-Quadro-K2200    The Quadro K620 looks great--I just need one DVI-I and one DP  display connectors. 2gb memory is probably fine for PS CS6.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2015, 02:50:19 pm by BobDavid »
Logged

TonyW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2015, 03:00:58 pm »

The K2200 looks even better with twice as much video ram and overall greater proc. speed.

Remember you will need DisplayPort for 10 bit as it is not supported in DVI

I went through all this when spec. new PC build and had difficulty deciding as at the time no new monitor in the equation therefore settled on the relatively inexpensive GTX 960 4 GB RAM as I thought I would wait for 4K to become more mainstream and loose premium pricing
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2015, 03:38:46 pm »

I went ahead and purchased the K620 for $160 at Newegg. It's less than half the price of the K1220 ($365). Since my primary applications is PS CS6, I figure it should be fine. I'll keep you posted. I hope installing the driver doesn't become a road trip to hell.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2015, 03:47:27 pm by BobDavid »
Logged

TonyW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2015, 04:37:15 pm »

Hi Bob,

WOW, that was a quick decision, was kinda hoping that others may have chimed in to give a more balanced view to help in your decision process  :D

Still I think that your decision a good one to gain entry into a 30 bit world  8) and at a quite reasonable cost.

I will be very interested to hear about your experiences particularly in comparison if possible with your old 24 bit workflow

Edit:  Have you any particular reason to stay Win7 if not you may appreciate Win 10 currently a free upgrade from MS.  Have converted all my PC's and noticed some performance benefits and now the Start menu back not too steep a learning curve - just a thought of course
« Last Edit: November 01, 2015, 04:43:50 pm by TonyW »
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #8 on: November 01, 2015, 08:19:22 pm »

I've spent about twelve hours researching 10-bit Adobe workflow. The Quadro K620 appears to have the correct specs. I figure for $160, it's worth trying out the K620. If it doesn't support Adobe OpenGL, so be it. it will still perform a smidge better than the GeForce card it's replacing. At this time, I cannot afford to spend $$$$ for a graphics card.
Logged

Yahor Shumski

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21
    • My business
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2015, 02:39:24 pm »

I've spent about twelve hours researching 10-bit Adobe workflow. The Quadro K620 appears to have the correct specs. I figure for $160, it's worth trying out the K620. If it doesn't support Adobe OpenGL, so be it. it will still perform a smidge better than the GeForce card it's replacing. At this time, I cannot afford to spend $$$$ for a graphics card.

I have the same Quadro K620 card and was able to enable 30bit mode in Photoshop CC. Keep in mind you have to switch Proof colors in View menu.
Logged
Adobe Certified Expert (Photoshop CC)

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2015, 12:49:12 am »

I have the same Quadro K620 card and was able to enable 30bit mode in Photoshop CC. Keep in mind you have to switch Proof colors in View menu.

That I did not know. Does this apply to CS6/Windows 7?
Logged

TonyW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2015, 10:17:22 am »

I have the same Quadro K620 card and was able to enable 30bit mode in Photoshop CC. Keep in mind you have to switch Proof colors in View menu.
Are you sure about this and is it documented somewhere?  I had been under the impression that up to the arrival of CS6 10 bit only partially implemented (whatever that meant!) but from CS6 10 bit pipeline fully implemented in Windows not in Mac.

There are a couple of test objects available which may be of interest

10 bit test ramp .psd Here from Imagescience

NEC also offers a 10 bit demo application but not sure if only aimed at NEC monitors as the application refuses to start with my current GTX960 as it does not recognize it as 10 bit (well, its not other than in Direct X)
http://www.necdisplay.com/monitor-software
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #12 on: November 13, 2015, 10:35:48 am »

The 10-bit ramp looks great--smooth as silk so long as I view the file at 66.7%. For some reason, and it is well-documented, the display reverts to 8-bit when viewed at less than 66.7%. What I find frustrating is that sometimes the soft proof matches the printer's output while other times it doesn't. Files with lots of values at or less than 100,100,100 look fine in the soft proof, but come out dark on the print. I've set the monitor to 70 CDM, 5000K, and 2.1 gamma. I edit the file in aRGB and then soft proof using the paper ICC profile. I feel like I'm going around in circles without arriving at a solution. My paper profiles are very good to excellent.
Logged

DaveRichardson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2015, 01:20:43 pm »

Bob - with the mismatched prints being the darker prints, have you tried a higher display gamma than 2.1. I have mine set to 2.2 but, depending on the brightness of the room, you may find a higher display gamma works better. There is an explanation on the Argyll CMS website on why higher than 2.2 may be appropriate.

Dave
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #14 on: November 13, 2015, 02:21:29 pm »

Bob - with the mismatched prints being the darker prints, have you tried a higher display gamma than 2.1. I have mine set to 2.2 but, depending on the brightness of the room, you may find a higher display gamma works better. There is an explanation on the Argyll CMS website on why higher than 2.2 may be appropriate.

Dave

I'll give it a go. The reason (and probably not a good one) is that when I first set up the Eizo, I used their black and white chart. The one where you match up the square that looks solid grey compared to the others. The one at 2.1 seemed like the closest match. ... I will try 2.2 and then 2.4 for the sake of comparison. The nice thing about the monitor is that it is easy to call up different profiles. Thanks for the tip...
Logged

TonyW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #15 on: November 13, 2015, 03:28:42 pm »

Not sure what you will get out of this as there seem to be conflicting opinions as to what is happening in Windows with 10 bit display and Adobe products. I am not sure what to make of any claims due to not being in a position to test first hand but pass this on hoping you may find the answers and share with others
 
I'll give it a go. The reason (and probably not a good one) is that when I first set up the Eizo, I used their black and white chart. The one where you match up the square that looks solid grey compared to the others. The one at 2.1 seemed like the closest match. ... I will try 2.2 and then 2.4 for the sake of comparison. The nice thing about the monitor is that it is easy to call up different profiles. Thanks for the tip...
It may be an obvious question (sorry!) but have you actually calibrated and profiled the monitor using your calibrator or have you made visual choices based on eye balling charts and select some preset?

Quote
The 10-bit ramp looks great--smooth as silk so long as I view the file at 66.7%. For some reason, and it is well-documented, the display reverts to 8-bit when viewed at less than 66.7%.
I have heard of the issues of less than accurate display at other than 100% but did not imagine that this would impact bit depth
Quote
What I find frustrating is that sometimes the soft proof matches the printer's output while other times it doesn't. Files with lots of values at or less than 100,100,100 look fine in the soft proof, but come out dark on the print. I've set the monitor to 70 CDM, 5000K, and 2.1 gamma. I edit the file in aRGB and then soft proof using the paper ICC profile. I feel like I'm going around in circles without arriving at a solution.
How do things look (in print) when you calibrate to D65 and 2.2 gamma i.e. closer to native?
Quote
My paper profiles are very good to excellent.
How can you know this when printer output is 'iffy' (sometimes matching sometimes not soft proof) also how good can you say your monitor profile is?  Just playing Devils Advocate here but... ;)

FWIW came across a post some time ago discussing related issues mainly concerned about CC but CS6 also mentioned - worth reading to see if you can make any sense and reach a conclusion?

This Thread started 2013 ending 2015
https://forums.adobe.com/message/5910632

It seems that some are having problems with PS CC 2014 and not with CS6
 "In PS CS6 the ramp is smooth. In PS CC the steps can be seen in the ramp"

Chris Cox reply
Adobe has enabled 30 bit processing - that hasn't changed since CS6.
There is nothing else to enable - it's already there, and working.
You may have older drivers or some other problem on your system preventing it from working correctly.
But Photoshop already does what you're asking.


Post #17
Suggests as you have found that at 100% view ok but at 50% banding appears. 
It also suggests that with the PS selection tool the same thing happens - this I can understand as selections are always 8 bit

Next posts contradicts this saying CS6 fine at any zoom ratio.
I think posts #22 #23 closer to reaching a conclusion the panels (may be?)  8 bit + FRC so the 10 bit is creating the illusion of 10 bit data using dithering.  So how the monitor implements this plus how sensitive you are to seeing the dithering must go a long way to how you/we perceive the image

One poster suggests that the outcome seem due to OpenGL incompatibility with Photoshop's Zoom scaling routine and goes on to say that with another 10 bit application no banding seen at any zoom ratio

If this is true then as CS6 is no longer a current product I cannot see that Adobe will offer a fix anytime never mind anytime soon  :(

Post #49 mentions the use of Soft proofing with a printer profile 'solving' the banding issue similar to Yahor's experience

Another posts suggests:
There is no OpenGL path to 30 bits on windows 8 or 8.1 or 10.  And currently PS uses OpenGL on both windows, and mac.

No back up to any documentation

Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #16 on: November 13, 2015, 05:56:19 pm »

Hi Tony,

I calibrated the monitor first using an i1Pro. Then I looked at the target to see the gamma chart. After that, I calibrated the monitor and specified 2.1 gamma. Many years ago I tried working in D65, I opted to use 5000K because I seemed to get a better match with prints, especially taking into account where they are displayed. I am printing with an Epson 7890. I have access to a 9890, so I think I'll do a test to see if the file prints out the same on each printer. Theoretically, the output should be very close, if not virtually identical.


My lightroom is in a dedicated space with subdued lighting and a solux lamp off in the corner. When I hold prints up a few feet away from the lamp, the pictures look great--they match what I'm seeing on the screen.

And I am running Windows 7.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2015, 06:00:04 pm by BobDavid »
Logged

D Fosse

  • Guest
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #17 on: November 14, 2015, 08:05:52 am »

Then I looked at the target to see the gamma chart. After that, I calibrated the monitor and specified 2.1 gamma.

In a color managed context, gamma should just be as close to native as possible. It's transparent to the user - gamma encoding in the source profile is remapped to the display profile (whatever the monitor gamma/TRC is) and the result is a visually linear response.

Native gamma ensures that the monitor behaves well. No drastic adjustments to its natural response are necessary.

The gamma setting is more important without color management. Here you don't have any remapping and the gamma encoding in the file needs to be accurately countered by the monitor gamma. So an sRGB file (gamma encoded to 2.2 <more or less>) will be correctly rendered on a standard monitor (gamma 2.2).

In real life no monitor follows an ideal gamma curve, so that's why color management is about more than just color. It also corrects accurately for the monitor's quirky tone response curve. Natively, most LCDs have a dip in the shadows that only full color management can correct for. This is why a non-color managed display usually has a lot less shadow separation.
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #18 on: November 14, 2015, 10:49:47 am »

The shadow separation on the monitor is mind-blowing--the luminance is set to 70 CDM. I may bring the luminance down to 60. I will bring the gamma back up to 2.2, and experiment with different color temperatures.

I had a good printing session last night. I have reverted back to interpreting numerical data and correlating that to the historgram and then back to the monitor. The CX241 uses dual LEDs to illuminate the panel. I'm beginning to suspect that having been accustomed to using pre LED LCD panels over the last ten years may be part of my problem.

Color management is tricky to set up.
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: 10 bit display
« Reply #19 on: November 14, 2015, 10:59:40 am »

The shadow separation on the monitor is mind-blowing--the luminance is set to 70 CDM. I may bring the luminance down to 60. I will bring the gamma back up to 2.2, and experiment with different color temperatures.

I had a good printing session last night. I have reverted back to interpreting numerical data and correlating that to the historgram and then back to the monitor. The CX241 uses dual LEDs to illuminate the panel. I'm beginning to suspect that having been accustomed to using pre LED LCD panels over the last ten years may be part of my problem.

Color management is tricky to set up.

For soft proofing, the surround makes a big difference. What do you have your surround set to? "Black" is almost always the wrong answer. Soft proofing also depends on how much of your surround is "covered" by the image.

Jim
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up