<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">> I'm against both. Against as default.<br>
><br>
> 1) I don't know how about painting, but in photography 16bit makes<br>
> absolutely nothing. Well, yes, you can invent a couple of testcases with<br>
> "just-converted-from-raw" files, but the result will be extremely subtle. It<br>
> surely does not worth doubled memory/cpu consumption.<br>
> There are HDR's but:<br>
> a) they are not default choice for Krita<br>
> b) after temporary merge in 16bit done, nevertheless they should be<br>
> converted to 8bit<br>
<br>
</div>But when you work with photos's you load an existing image, right? You don't start<br>
with a blank image -- this proposal won't convert an 8 bit/channel photo to 16bit/channel<br>
on loading.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why not add yet another template then?</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im"><br>
> 2) What are you speaking about, guys!? That is a completely theoretical<br>
> colorspace! It has nothing common with real life! There is hardly present a<br>
> monitor covering AdobeRGB, not speaking about this stuff.<br>
<br>
</div>Maxy found when experimenting with mypaint that using 16 bit/channel rgb images<br>
gave noticeably smoothing strokes when painting (<a href="http://mypaint.intilinux.com/?p=19" target="_blank">http://mypaint.intilinux.com/?p=19</a>),<br>
so it could be worth experimenting with.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My guts say that PS can work well without this excessive memory/cpu consumption in 8bit. I have a feeling that we try to hide our software bugs inside more wide colorspace. That is not good.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">> Yes, this is really funny to scale a dalai lama picture, but it'll create<br>
> an enormous amount of problems to our users working with real-world images.<br>
><br>
> PS:<br>
> I'm not even speak about the problems our users face, when they decide to<br>
> print their masterpiece in the lab..<br>
<br>
</div>I'm not sure that there will be problems, given that if you start with a photo,<br>
you will keep the colorspace and bit depth your photo was in, unless you manually<br>
convert. (That said, Maxy also noted that linear rgb gave unintuitive results for<br>
painting. On the other hand, Gegl uses linear light float/channel rgb as the internal<br>
format.)</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I do noot mean photos there. I mean paintings.</div><div> </div></div><br>-- <br>Dmitry Kazakov<br>