I am currently working on a design for a website in Photoshop CS5. As it is now, I am using RGB 32 bits per channel (bpc). I chose this, instead of 16 or 8 bits per channel because I can clearly see the difference between these 3 and 32 bpc just looks better. So far, the question if using 32 bpc for webdesign is actually possible (i.e. how to export the images? Can browsers actually handle this? etc.) was answered by the fact that I opened a snapshot from a website (that I thought had a nice design) in Photoshop and that I could not replicate parts of this website by using 8 bpc or 16 bpc. In example: the gradient that they used for the menubar just didn't look exactly the same as the one I used when trying to replicate it. Only after converting my image to 32 bpc I could exactly match it. Thus...I figured that this particular website was using 32bpc somehow AND my browser appearantly can display it, so from then on I'm using 32 bpc for my website.
Long story, but I promise we're getting to the point soon. As the website is getting closer to finish I am doing some researching again about what image mode (how many bpc) I should in fact use for webdesign and I cannot find a definate answer.
Most sites/blogs/forums state that for current-day webdesign, 24 bit color, which is 8bpc should be used. One of the reasons for this, they say, is that most monitors can not display more then this. Another reason is that Photoshop only allows to use the 'safe for the web' function when 8bpc mode is used.
Now my confusion lies here. For starters, if most (consumer) monitors can not display higher color depths then 8bpc, then why do I see a clear difference when converting from 32bpc to 16 and 8bpc? As for the 'save for the web' function, in CS5 this funtion is also supported when using 16 bpc, so that can't be the issue either.
And then that particular website I mentioned earlier. If they use 8bpc, then why is it that I can not replicate the menubar when using 8bpc but only when I use 32 bpc?
And browsers, do they (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, etc.) support more then 8bpc, or is this not relevant and is it only about what monitors support?
As you can see, I am still quite confused. Any guidance or info from those of you who really understand these things would be VERY welcome!
Joined: 28 Aug 2010
Posts: 114
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 1:48 pm Post subject: Re: Colors, bits & channels... Who can enlighten me?
eendje01 wrote:
Now my confusion lies here. For starters, if most (consumer) monitors can not display higher color depths then 8bpc, then why do I see a clear difference when converting from 32bpc to 16 and 8bpc?
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:57 pm Post subject: Re: Colors, bits & channels... Who can enlighten me?
Damo77 wrote:
You shouldn't be able to. What sort of difference do you see?
The colors are a bit more vivid, especially text looks more 'clear' in 32bit per channel then in 8 bit per channel.
I think this has to do with the fact that I created this design in 32bpc and then converted it to 8bpc. If I started vice versa there probably wouldn't be a difference. Still it's a bit odd that I see a difference while on a lot of sources I read that the difference shouldn't be visible to our eye, especially on regular monitors.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
