A corollary to false banding is that images sometimes change noticeably when flattened. There will be slight changes to contrast, brightness, and/or saturation when you go to print the image and start by flattening it. There's no visible banding in the image (so no hint that you have an issue), but the 8-bit display isn't accurately displaying what's really happening in the background in 16-bit. However, when you flatten to the image and see the 16-bit result, it's subtly (and suddenly) obvious that the flattened 16-bit version is different than the the unflattened 8-bit version that was displaying on the monitor.
Another great tip! Temporarily flattening layers or creating a temporary stamped layer is useful to see how the actual 16-bit version of the image looks, whether any banding has appeared or not.
Ps also has 32-bits (per channel, bpc) that looks even better than 16. It's a miracle if we consider that our monitors/displays have only 8. Between what Ps does and our eye a lot happens - the operating system, drivers, etc., do their thing. And then we may have bought a gamer's monitor that does dynamic contrast enhancement (imprecisely in a way that can become visible in stills). As we shoot "14-bits" with our digital (color) cameras we forget that its sensor is colorblind and analog, however it sees the entire humanly visible spectrum: that's "panchromatic" in old B&W terms. We get color because over the sensor there's a color filter grid (generally after Mr. Bayer's ideas) that cuts away visible light and so each photosite in the sensor sees only one color-band: that's "monochromatic" in old B&W terms. This means we do not have 14-bpc RGB pixels in the raw file, but rather a 14-bits monochrome (one color) data element associated with each photosite. As each raw data element has exposure data in one spectral color band, it misses two, and raw processing turns this into RGB pixels. Software developers say the best cameras have a 27-bit color space (9+9+9 RGB - 8 times more than JPEG with 8+8+8 RGB bits). That's far from 16 bits per channel (16+16+16=48) or 32 bpc (32+32+32=96) but as raw processing has become rather good at wild-assed guessing missing colors it also has become good at wild-assed gradation. I would say to the people developing raw processing software, "no, dummy, 27 is the best >you< think you can do - it's not the camera". Quality differs greatly between this and that brand/product doing raw processing when you go to extremities. If you need to blow up beyond 100%, you might want to take something like Topaz's Gigapixel AI instead of Lr/Ps. And, in this sense, when you print, then make a calculation of your chosen printer resolution and print size and see what (linear) enlargement (pixel invention) is going on in there. Because in cleverly upsampling your image with a great 3rd party app, you get better results than from leaving the upscaling to unqualified drivers and printer engines. To go back to "fake banding" - assuming that's on your display, not in your photograph - this may just be an artifact from the driver of your graphics adapter or the engine in, the driver with, your display. Note that "color space" (the ability to depict nuances) between displays differs a lot, but also note you cannot judge this without considering dynamic range. So, increase dynamic range without the gradation levels (bits color space and bpc) and at some point you end up with banding, unless the driver layer and below can smooth that out.
I've also noticed that it's not just extreme adjustments that can create false banding. Simply having a lot of adjustment layers with smaller adjustments on each also seems to produce it. Likely these smaller adjustments add up to enough changes that lead to the false banding, but it seems fairly common whenever I get a lot of adjustments layers stacked on the image.
This happens to me in my version of Lightroom all the time and is super annoying having to zoom to 100% in and out all the time to check if my adjustments are really destroying the photo or not.
I'm also getting what appears to be banding using Ps HDR Pro merging 3 images at +2 -2 0. When done via LrC the result does not have banding. Suggestions?
Hey Tom. Sorry, I'm not much help with that. I have not used Ps HDR Pro very much. It's pretty old tech at this point I think? I have always done manual exposure blending.
I have had no banding issues in PS, but when viewing the photo later on a tablet (Samsung Tab A) I sometimes see banding. Is this because of the resolution of the tablet screen?
I've never used that tablet so it's hard for me to know. Probably not related to tablet resolution, but it could have to do with the color gamut? Make sure your images are sRGB before viewing on the tablet maybe?
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. Sean, my issue isn't on screen. My at-home paper prints look great also, but often my metal prints come back with a ton of banding in the sky it it's bright or cloudless. Very frustrating....
@@rudeboymendo That may be a limitation of their aluminum printing process. I would suggest calling HD Aluminum Prints (www.hdaluminumprints.com) to ask about getting a test print to see if their system does better. I have been printing aluminum with them for years and have never had banding issues.
@@SeanBagshaw I recently started using Randy and crew and HDAP and love the results and their service if needed! They now print all my aluminum prints for the galleries...
I wish most of my banding was false. I edit 16 ibt images, but sometimes I have a feeling that can get banding just when looking on a shot. Just introduce couple Nik plugins and it is there.
Hi Sean: Thanks for creating and sharing this video. I wondered why this banding occurs. I can't wait to see more of your upcoming course on Printing. I love printing my image. Keep well. . . Cheers, Keith
Hi Sean, thank you for the information on False Banding. I was going insane trying to work out how to remove some banding in a recent edit, your video helped a lot, it showed me that my banding is not present once I zoom into 66.7% and beyond it still seems evident when I export (save for web) for an Instagram post. Is there anything we need to consider to ensure any banding is not present once we either export or save for web?
Very very useful Sean, Thanks. Another problem is that when exported to a JPEG file the banding appeared when there was no banding in 16 bits file. I usually add some noise and export again to check if the banding disappears, but have to do it very carefully and export again and again, cause I don't want more noise, just enough noise to clean the banding.
I haven't had this problem. Are you exporting to JPEG with the ProPhoto RGB color space? That could potentially do it. Try converting to sRGB first and then saving as a jpeg maybe?
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
![I Replaced ALL my ADOBE APPS with these [free or cheaper] Alternatives!](/img/1.gif)
A corollary to false banding is that images sometimes change noticeably when flattened. There will be slight changes to contrast, brightness, and/or saturation when you go to print the image and start by flattening it. There's no visible banding in the image (so no hint that you have an issue), but the 8-bit display isn't accurately displaying what's really happening in the background in 16-bit. However, when you flatten to the image and see the 16-bit result, it's subtly (and suddenly) obvious that the flattened 16-bit version is different than the the unflattened 8-bit version that was displaying on the monitor.
Another great tip! Temporarily flattening layers or creating a temporary stamped layer is useful to see how the actual 16-bit version of the image looks, whether any banding has appeared or not.
Ps also has 32-bits (per channel, bpc) that looks even better than 16. It's a miracle if we consider that our monitors/displays have only 8. Between what Ps does and our eye a lot happens - the operating system, drivers, etc., do their thing. And then we may have bought a gamer's monitor that does dynamic contrast enhancement (imprecisely in a way that can become visible in stills).
As we shoot "14-bits" with our digital (color) cameras we forget that its sensor is colorblind and analog, however it sees the entire humanly visible spectrum: that's "panchromatic" in old B&W terms. We get color because over the sensor there's a color filter grid (generally after Mr. Bayer's ideas) that cuts away visible light and so each photosite in the sensor sees only one color-band: that's "monochromatic" in old B&W terms. This means we do not have 14-bpc RGB pixels in the raw file, but rather a 14-bits monochrome (one color) data element associated with each photosite. As each raw data element has exposure data in one spectral color band, it misses two, and raw processing turns this into RGB pixels. Software developers say the best cameras have a 27-bit color space (9+9+9 RGB - 8 times more than JPEG with 8+8+8 RGB bits). That's far from 16 bits per channel (16+16+16=48) or 32 bpc (32+32+32=96) but as raw processing has become rather good at wild-assed guessing missing colors it also has become good at wild-assed gradation. I would say to the people developing raw processing software, "no, dummy, 27 is the best >you< think you can do - it's not the camera". Quality differs greatly between this and that brand/product doing raw processing when you go to extremities. If you need to blow up beyond 100%, you might want to take something like Topaz's Gigapixel AI instead of Lr/Ps. And, in this sense, when you print, then make a calculation of your chosen printer resolution and print size and see what (linear) enlargement (pixel invention) is going on in there.
Because in cleverly upsampling your image with a great 3rd party app, you get better results than from leaving the upscaling to unqualified drivers and printer engines.
To go back to "fake banding" - assuming that's on your display, not in your photograph - this may just be an artifact from the driver of your graphics adapter or the engine in, the driver with, your display. Note that "color space" (the ability to depict nuances) between displays differs a lot, but also note you cannot judge this without considering dynamic range. So, increase dynamic range without the gradation levels (bits color space and bpc) and at some point you end up with banding, unless the driver layer and below can smooth that out.
I've also noticed that it's not just extreme adjustments that can create false banding. Simply having a lot of adjustment layers with smaller adjustments on each also seems to produce it. Likely these smaller adjustments add up to enough changes that lead to the false banding, but it seems fairly common whenever I get a lot of adjustments layers stacked on the image.
Excellent added point, Tony. The lesson being, if you see banding whatever the cause...double check to determine if it is actually there or not.
Very helpful! Was wondering when I saw this condition before. Thanks Sean! Oh and good morning from WA State :)
Good morning from next door! 😁
@@SeanBagshaw bring your camera and come visit us up north this summer 🙂
Great information, Thank you ! also btw I have a home not far from your image... love the area!
Love that area!
that was genuinely really helpful, Thanks Sean!
This happens to me in my version of Lightroom all the time and is super annoying having to zoom to 100% in and out all the time to check if my adjustments are really destroying the photo or not.
That’s a bummer
I'm also getting what appears to be banding using Ps HDR Pro merging 3 images at +2 -2 0. When done via LrC the result does not have banding. Suggestions?
Hey Tom. Sorry, I'm not much help with that. I have not used Ps HDR Pro very much. It's pretty old tech at this point I think? I have always done manual exposure blending.
I have had no banding issues in PS, but when viewing the photo later on a tablet (Samsung Tab A) I sometimes see banding. Is this because of the resolution of the tablet screen?
I've never used that tablet so it's hard for me to know. Probably not related to tablet resolution, but it could have to do with the color gamut? Make sure your images are sRGB before viewing on the tablet maybe?
@@SeanBagshawThx
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. Sean, my issue isn't on screen. My at-home paper prints look great also, but often my metal prints come back with a ton of banding in the sky it it's bright or cloudless. Very frustrating....
Who do you order metal prints from?
@@SeanBagshaw Bay Photo
@@rudeboymendo That may be a limitation of their aluminum printing process. I would suggest calling HD Aluminum Prints (www.hdaluminumprints.com) to ask about getting a test print to see if their system does better. I have been printing aluminum with them for years and have never had banding issues.
@@SeanBagshaw I recently started using Randy and crew and HDAP and love the results and their service if needed! They now print all my aluminum prints for the galleries...
@@dndparks Agree! Randy and his team are the best! I'm delivering 4 big prints they did for one of my customers today, in fact.
Great , I got false banding when I bought my 645D and was quite shocked - I ended up burring the the blue sky - I needn't have bothered.
Thanks, this was great tip. Need to go and check mine settings, it was 16. 👍
Thank you for this Information
I wish most of my banding was false. I edit 16 ibt images, but sometimes I have a feeling that can get banding just when looking on a shot. Just introduce couple Nik plugins and it is there.
Bummer. Yeah...I think some of the Nik filters really push the image data to the limit.
Hi Sean: Thanks for creating and sharing this video. I wondered why this banding occurs. I can't wait to see more of your upcoming course on Printing. I love printing my image. Keep well. . . Cheers, Keith
Thanks Keith!
Hi Sean, thank you for the information on False Banding. I was going insane trying to work out how to remove some banding in a recent edit, your video helped a lot, it showed me that my banding is not present once I zoom into 66.7% and beyond it still seems evident when I export (save for web) for an Instagram post. Is there anything we need to consider to ensure any banding is not present once we either export or save for web?
Mr. Bagshaw, thanks for this tip. Very useful!
Best regards from Rio de Janeiro/Brazil.
Fantastic information, Sean. As usual !!!
This is a wonderful tip Sean! I was using a proof print, now I no longer need to waste paper and ink!
Very very useful Sean, Thanks. Another problem is that when exported to a JPEG file the banding appeared when there was no banding in 16 bits file. I usually add some noise and export again to check if the banding disappears, but have to do it very carefully and export again and again, cause I don't want more noise, just enough noise to clean the banding.
I haven't had this problem. Are you exporting to JPEG with the ProPhoto RGB color space? That could potentially do it. Try converting to sRGB first and then saving as a jpeg maybe?