User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
Roger Breton wrote:
Thank you Graeme for coming on with these thoughts about the meaning of
absolute gamut mapping in the context of screen display. I know I'd like
someday to have a way to choose how I want images white point to be adapted
on my monitor when the need to display them arises.
....
> I think that would promote a huge awareness to color appearance,
all of a sudden, among users. Or would it? Come to think of it, that would
depend on the frequency of 'white point mismatch' between whathever white
point calibration and images reference white. I know some shops that
strictly adhere to AdobeRGB in all their digital capture and their screen
calibration. To them that situation would never be a problem. But then when
they send images to me, who works on a D50 or 'native' white calibration
what's going to happen?
Well of course the whole point of this discussion is that all this
worked perfectly well with most CMM's and profiles prior to the
introduction of the V4 spec. If you wanted an adapted white point
use relative colorimetric. If you don't want your white point
adapted, choose absolute colorimetric.
With V4 compliant CMMs and profiles, it's all been broken. If
only four intent choices are provided, there's now no way of
choosing real absolute intent for display profiles (relative
and absolute end up being the same for display profiles). A fifth
intent is needed to restore the previous functionality.
Without this fifth intent, it's no longer possible to do spot
color comparison with a non-D50 white point monitor.
