|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
is this amount of banding normal?
Hi, i have attached two images, original file size is 12 mpix white bacground and i used 2000 px black softbrush. the secon attached immage is 100 % crop. http://postimage.org/image/7y0o4w6z9/ http://postimage.org/image/hx8gpr85h/ Nov 16 12 09:21 am Link I don't see any on my monitor. Nov 16 12 09:38 am Link Very difficult to see any banding on my monitor. Could be a problem w/ OP's monitor or video card. Nov 16 12 09:42 am Link I see a lot. It is the same in print. Althoug looking on ipad right now and i dont see any. Nov 16 12 09:43 am Link I'm on an imac, and I see a lot of banding as well. Usually i run into that when i'm playing with shadows/hilights in photoshop too much Nov 16 12 10:03 am Link Do you use calibrated monitor. I mean hardware calibrated. Probably your settings are off. I see very little almost no banding. And that is most likely because of the limitations of my display and probably not in the gradient itself. Nov 16 12 10:09 am Link I see it mostly where it would graduate to pure white there are some steps to it. I don't see much of a problem on the second image. Nov 16 12 10:32 am Link I see banding on the 2nd one with my eMac CRT. Nov 16 12 10:53 am Link On my iMac I see minor banding on the first image and a lot on the second. KM Nov 16 12 11:02 am Link My Imac is harware calibrated. It seems that only mac users of this forum can see banding. I get banding with anything i do in photoshop that has to do somethin with soft brushes or feathering and usual tricks like adding noise on overlay gray layer help a bit but not that much realy. Nov 16 12 11:15 am Link I'm on a macbookpro from 2006. First image isn't noticeable to me until I get super close to the screen. The second image is definitely noticeable Nov 16 12 11:18 am Link I see no evidence of banding on both my 10-bit Eizo ColorEdge and 10-bit Asus PA246. Must be something wrong with your 6-bit display. Nov 16 12 11:27 am Link That is the advantage of 10-bit output  Nov 16 12 11:31 am Link spikey123123 wrote: I see a huge amount of banding in that second image. In fact, I don't see much smooth gradation at all. I'm on a 15" Toshiba Satellite notebook. Nov 16 12 11:42 am Link Yes, banding is definitely there. To see it more easily, add a Levels adjustment layer and drag the end points in. The more contrast you add this way, the more the bands will show up. To remove it, add some noise and then gaussian blur the result. Won't get rid of 100%, but can help. Sometimes doing that in gradual steps works even better. There have been lots of disussions about this. Many claim that banding is a result of working in 8 bit mode. That's somewhat true when applying tone/contrast adjustments to "natural" areas like skies. But long ago, some guru claimed that the adjustment brush and gradient tools in Photoshop operate in 8 bit mode even when you are working on a 16 bit image. I believe that, and I think this sample demonstrates it. Use a large soft black brush on a white background and you get some banding, regardless of whether the image is 8 bit or 16 bit. Nov 16 12 11:45 am Link Mac w/retina display picks it right up! Nov 16 12 11:46 am Link I, too, am on a Mac, with two calibrated monitors, one an LCD, the other a CRT. On the page, viewed through my browser, I see banding in both. But I dragged the images to PhotoShop, and I immediately see two things: (1) the image files in PS display no banding; and (2) both image files are in the Adobe RGB color space. It is the second item that is, I think, the problem. While Safari (my web browser) is supposed to be color-space aware, I'm not sure it always is. I think the issue is that being in Adobe RGB is what creates the problem. Nov 16 12 11:50 am Link Working in 8 bit often gives this banding. Best way to deal with it is to do the work in 16 bit. Then put 1% or 2% noise in before reducing to 8 bit for printing. Helps to have extra memory installed to work in 16 bit, or most operations will be a little slower. In earlier versions of PS there are some operations that you can't do in 16 bit. Also, your save times in PS will be longer. Nov 16 12 11:57 am Link Yea I see a lot of it in both. I'm not sure if you're trying to get rid of it? I get this too at times. I usually add a little bit of noise (gaussian and monochromatic selected) then I gaussian blur it. It helps reduce the banding a lot for me. Nov 16 12 02:35 pm Link no banding at all. well, when I swap my monitor with the cheapo Neovo F-419 (that has been resting in dust for the last 5 years), I see a lot of banding, though Nov 16 12 03:45 pm Link I see banding on both. Nov 16 12 04:38 pm Link I see clear visible banding in second image. Is it normal? Yep but not maybe not desirable. Shoot Raw, work in 16bit, avoid heavy processing like levels, saturation, and add a little noise if needed as mentioned. Save at best quality for particular output. Nov 17 12 09:34 am Link The banding is particularly noticeable on the second image and I'm on a PC. My monitor hasn't been specially calibrated but I bought a pretty good one as its what I watch TV episodes online on. I have only experienced banding a couple of times. It was when I made lower resolution copies of an image and the sky banded badly, but not in the high resolution copies, Nov 17 12 09:46 am Link I have to really strain to notice banding on the second image.....really being the key word. I'm looking on a LaCie. Nov 17 12 12:40 pm Link I see banding prominently..almost looks like an image displayed on a monitor without a wide gamut... I didn't check, but is this an image converted to sRGB? Nov 17 12 05:55 pm Link Redcrown wrote: This won't just help you see possible banding, this will also create banding where there was none before! Nov 17 12 06:04 pm Link The banding is there (you can analyse it mathematically in Photoshop) - as it will be in any 8-bit file with a big, smooth gradient (so all you guys with 10-bit monitors who aren't seeing it: you may be having calibration problems - I went through quite a few third-party calibration apps, with my i1 Display2, before I found one that could give me good blacks ... Argyle and the stock software: terrible crushed blacks ... or it could be that your monitor or graphics h/w is interpolating for you - which could be a problem) Most new iMacs and Macbooks-post 2010 should give you an 8-bit display, as does the iPad (at least from iPad 2) Banding's worse through image preview because it's (I assume) doing a cruder AdobeRGB conversion (more rounding error), but in Photoshop you should be able to see banding all the way to the blacks, albeit smoother ... Best practical solution: (1) convert to sRGB; (2) do all your processing at 16-bit Nov 18 12 01:32 pm Link Check the monitor calibration curves, more deviation from 45º will give more banding and 10-bit output with 45º calibration curves should have zero banding...  More info in http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/.../mo … ration.htm A PRO monitor(NEC PA/P, Eizo CG/SX, Quato Intelli Proof) with a programmable hardware internal LUT will have 45º calibration curves... All consumer grade calibration devices have difficult into reading the darker parts(which make the matter worse), the X-rite i1Display pro/ColorMunki Display are better. Benski , matrix profiles will have better gradient than LUT profiles, try the new argyll+dispcalGUI with “black point compensation” to avoid black crush, also a single curve+matrix will give better neutrals and curves + matrix, better colors. Nov 18 12 01:52 pm Link Cheers, I'll try Argyll again - I will say it gave me some of the least banding in the mid-tones, and very good colours, but terrible blacks (good 2 inches of solid black on the test gradient I use) ColorEyes has been the best overall for me so far - very good blacks Nov 18 12 02:11 pm Link |
