Some time ago while working with gray height map images, I noticed that 16 bit gray scale images were often preferable relative to 8 bit format images. The reason for this being that often when rendering terrain height maps in 8 bit format that I would have obvious terrain artifacts appearing in the image. A three dimensional model would often appear less resolved relative to the 16 bit format of the same terrain image. This lack of resolution in photography would translate in the way of pixelation and blurriness. The deeper reason for this, however, lay embedded in the math of the gray scale format. Namely, in 8 bit grayscale format and image would merely have 256 gray light variations relative to 256*256 = 65536 variations of gray light color. 256 gray light variations may not seem on immediate inspection a source for complaint depending on terrain topography but if height maps were differed say by 10,000 ft for example. An 8 bit gray scale format would provide a step variation of 39 ft per gray light variation while a 16 bit channel furnishes .15 ft per gray light variation. The obvious difference is immediately striking by the math, and it is also the same for terrain elevation rendering in terms of smoothness and continuities. That is, the 16 bit format is likely to appear as having step discontinuities or 'bumps' and 'artifact' in the image making them appear synthetic or artificial.
The problem of 8 bit versus 16 bit format color format has applications as well notably in the way of processing digital images in a similar manner, but can at times especially in landscape photography be appreciated in a similar way. Notably, the 8 bit RGB format has similar a restriction of 256 light color variations per channel. This problem especially relates to pure gray light color variations say as given in clouds especially lacking variations in the RGB channels. A pure gray color, for instance, could be represented (120,120,120) mathematically in terms of it given color value, for instance, equally any pure gray light could be represented by (n,n,n) where n is some value between 0 and 255. It is important noting pure gray light is equal on all channels, and thus seeing the inherent problem as mentioned above. Pure gray light variations (where an image has more monochromatic attributes) become immediately observed.
While cloud variations may have many different shades and tones that definitely extend outside a monochrome, at times, maybe you have encountered photos where light pixels were definitely constrained inside this range? I have felt like in recent times actually I have in certain circumstances encountered it, and the effect in processing images were residual visual artifact that needed be resolved or at least were overlooked in the finishing process, or at least if having been left unresolved would translate into imaging artifacts like synthetic gradient lines furnishing step discontinuities...these are obvious to naked eye as artificial lines going beyond the distinction of a cloud and its surrounding background.
Moral: While decent entry level cameras not only furnish raw (uncompressed) format photos, it may help to know what color bit representation/resolution also occurs here. Optimally if cameras were situated at 16 bit per color channel RGB, digital representation of color would likely neither suffer from the problems found either in capturing an image in 8 bit per channel, or having at least finished rendering of the same type. Most web publishing today of photos stick with 8 bit formats. The image in the 16 bit format on the other hand while visually optimal is not optimal in the way of storage since 16 bit images are many times over the size of an 8 bit per channel image, but maybe someday pushing the standard for higher quality imaging will win out if culture changes, and this isn't received in the way as industry standards to push 24 bit audio formats have been received.
The problem of 8 bit versus 16 bit format color format has applications as well notably in the way of processing digital images in a similar manner, but can at times especially in landscape photography be appreciated in a similar way. Notably, the 8 bit RGB format has similar a restriction of 256 light color variations per channel. This problem especially relates to pure gray light color variations say as given in clouds especially lacking variations in the RGB channels. A pure gray color, for instance, could be represented (120,120,120) mathematically in terms of it given color value, for instance, equally any pure gray light could be represented by (n,n,n) where n is some value between 0 and 255. It is important noting pure gray light is equal on all channels, and thus seeing the inherent problem as mentioned above. Pure gray light variations (where an image has more monochromatic attributes) become immediately observed.
While cloud variations may have many different shades and tones that definitely extend outside a monochrome, at times, maybe you have encountered photos where light pixels were definitely constrained inside this range? I have felt like in recent times actually I have in certain circumstances encountered it, and the effect in processing images were residual visual artifact that needed be resolved or at least were overlooked in the finishing process, or at least if having been left unresolved would translate into imaging artifacts like synthetic gradient lines furnishing step discontinuities...these are obvious to naked eye as artificial lines going beyond the distinction of a cloud and its surrounding background.
Moral: While decent entry level cameras not only furnish raw (uncompressed) format photos, it may help to know what color bit representation/resolution also occurs here. Optimally if cameras were situated at 16 bit per color channel RGB, digital representation of color would likely neither suffer from the problems found either in capturing an image in 8 bit per channel, or having at least finished rendering of the same type. Most web publishing today of photos stick with 8 bit formats. The image in the 16 bit format on the other hand while visually optimal is not optimal in the way of storage since 16 bit images are many times over the size of an 8 bit per channel image, but maybe someday pushing the standard for higher quality imaging will win out if culture changes, and this isn't received in the way as industry standards to push 24 bit audio formats have been received.
