< 1 million clours

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Kelly
  • Start date Start date
J

John Kelly

Hello,

Did you know that the human eye can see slightly less than 1 million
colours?? Its a fact. Now that you know that are you wondering why your
monitor is set up at 16.7 million colours? Your system uses more resources
when set high and consequently will run slightly slower than is absolutely
necessary. The faster your machine is the less you are likely to notice the
loss of speed though I have changed my monitor settings to 16bpp (the lowest
it offers) down from 32 bpp which in mathematical terms is a massive change
Isee no change in the screen colour quality but accordding to the fact first
mentioned I would be a liar if I said I could. I have always used the higher
settings just because I know I can and in the mistaken belief I was seeing
better quality because of it.

What do you think ?

Best Wishes.....John Kelly
www.the-kelllys.org
 
On the contrary the 24-bit color display "looks" much better than 16-bit
display. Obviously it needs good eyesight :-)

For example, see this picture with a 16 bit display and then with a true
color display. The gradients show up much smoother in 24 bit display mode
while on 16 bit mode, it looks really awful.

http://x3.putfile.com/7/18506362751.png

Same difference can be observed with video. Try these texture loops in the
two modes:
http://www.mainconcept.com/texture_loops.shtml

What do you think?
 
Bill said:
... Obviously it needs good eyesight :-)
Click to expand...


According to expert scientist "Matthew B. Weyerich, Technical
Coordinator,ES&R Dept. CPI Corp", human eyesight can distinguish even
more than 16.7 million colors:


From MadSci newsgroup:
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/oct99/940018613.Eg.r.html

....
"16.7 million is a pretty good sampling of anything, but it turns out
not to be good enough. Your monitor simply can't display some colors.
The color gamut of most monitors is smaller than that of photographic
film, and certainly smaller than that of the human visual system."
....
 
QUICK QUICK....rush to your nearest medical researcher and donate your
eyes......you must be a mutant...of heck, are you an X-Man ??? We will get
that senator onto you...cancel that, he turned to water LOLOL

But, don't you think your argument should be true for all cases? If its only
true for a selected set of images then the aurgument is not proved. Try
playing a profesional DVD...do you still se a difference so great that you
can tell the difference (unaided of course) Back to your still...well yes if
you try to force the display set at 16bpp to show as in the case of your
still, a 24bpp your display is going to throw a wobbly....it does not know
how to deal with it and all of a sudden the relationship between any one
pixel and the next will be changed. The card cannot even do a nice even
graduation.....24bpp is equal to 8bpp for each of Red, Blue and
Green.......how do you split 16bpp so that it can give fair display....its
got 5bpp and one left over??? don't know about that !!!!

But, when you display a similar image made to work at 16bpp (which is still
way more than any human can actually see) and display it on any depth
greater than 16bpp what happens??? nothing, the image looks exactly the
same. and the reason for that is this time the card/monitor have no design
limitations and therefore does not fail in displaying properly the variation
between any two adjacent pixels and your eye/brain see a 1 million colour
representation of that picture.

That takes me right back to the begining......as you cant see more than a
million, why bother creating images that have more than a million???

I also tried it with a commercial DVD video I saw no difference but that
might be because of have WinDVD Platinum. I think I remember one of the
settings dealing with how colour was dealt with

It was interesting that you refered to 24bpp as being Truecolour....32bpp is
called Truecolour on mine

John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
 
QUICK QUICK....rush to your nearest medical researcher and donate your
eyes......you must be a mutant...of heck, are you an X-Man ??? We will get
that senator onto you...cancel that, he turned to water LOLOL

But, don't you think your argument should be true for all cases? If its only
true for a selected set of images then the aurgument is not proved. Try
playing a profesional DVD...do you still se a difference so great that you
can tell the difference (unaided of course) Back to your still...well yes if
you try to force the display set at 16bpp to show as in the case of your
still, a 24bpp your display is going to throw a wobbly....it does not know
how to deal with it and all of a sudden the relationship between any one
pixel and the next will be changed. The card cannot even do a nice even
graduation.....24bpp is equal to 8bpp for each of Red, Blue and
Green.......how do you split 16bpp so that it can give fair display....its
got 5bpp and one left over??? don't know about that !!!!

But, when you display a similar image made to work at 16bpp (which is still
way more than any human can actually see) and display it on any depth
greater than 16bpp what happens??? nothing, the image looks exactly the
same. and the reason for that is this time the card/monitor have no design
limitations and therefore does not fail in displaying properly the variation
between any two adjacent pixels and your eye/brain see a 1 million colour
representation of that picture.

That takes me right back to the begining......as you cant see more than a
million, why bother creating images that have more than a million???

I also tried it with a commercial DVD video I saw no difference but that
might be because of have WinDVD Platinum. I think I remember one of the
settings dealing with how colour was dealt with

It was interesting that you refered to 24bpp as being Truecolour....32bpp is
called Truecolour on mine

John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
Click to expand...

24bit and 32bit are the same in regards to number of colors. 32bit provides
an extra 8 bits that can be used for alpha layers.
 
Back
Top