Note that while both gradients appeared smooth before the corrections, the 8-bit image shows visible banding while the 16-bit image does not.

The gradient bar we originally applied to the bottom of the image visually confirms what the dialog boxes are telling us. Because there are thousands of levels ofl gray in each 16-bit channel, you have lots of extra data to work with while still maintaining a smooth tone distribution. The 16-bit image shows none of the gaps in tone that occurred with the 8-bit image above. Contrast this with the 16-bit image below. We applied two corrections to each of our image versions: First, we opened levels and moved the slider from 1.0 to 1.15 Second, we opened curves and moved the 160 level to 180.Īfter applying these changes, we opened the levels dialog box again to demonstrate the gaps in tone that resulted when retouching the 8-bit image, even after just two corrections. We flattened the layers so the bar would reflect the tone changes resulting from the corrections we planned to apply. Because neither image has been retouched, the gradient looks perfectly smooth on both the 8-bit and 16-bit images. We added a grayscale bar at the bottom of each version of the image. We duplicated the original file and opened one as 8-bit and one as 16-bit. Photoshop's Camera Raw plug-in gives you the option of opening the image as either an 8-bit or 16-bit image. We started with an image of a model car, taken with a Canon digital camera.

That's why we've started with the demonstration, which is followed by a more in-depth explanation below. 8-bit JPG when taking digital camera photographs is easy to demonstrate but harder to explain. The reason why you should opt for 16-bit camera RAW vs.

16 bit photo converter