• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: RGB Color Space Info Request
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RGB Color Space Info Request


  • Subject: Re: RGB Color Space Info Request
  • From: Neil Barstow <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 19:10:38 +0000

Hi Andrew
On 23/11/02 at , Andrew Rodney <email@hidden> wrote:

> I've scanned from a fairly wide gamut scanner (a FlexTight 848 using a
> custom profile made by the wonderful HCT Target) directly into several
> working spaces (sRGB, Adobe RGB and Wide Gamut RGB) then output to a fairly
> wide gamut device (A Fuji PG3500). On examination under a D50 lightbox, I
> could hardly see any difference at all. The 4x5 was the "famous" Yarn image
> that Kodak provided in the old days. IOW, a pretty saturated original. The
> differences on output were pretty mild giving me the impression that this
> entire Working Space debate is somewhat overblown. YES you do see
> significant differences when you plot the gamuts. But when ink hits paper
> (in this case when a laser exposes a silver media), the differences in the
> Working Spaces is pretty trivial.

my 2c

Speaking from a photographer's standpoint I think the preservation of
the detail and tonal info from an original is paramount [as well as the
colour of course].

What concerns me in this scenario -
when the savage [no gamut mapping] move from scanner space > RGB WS
clips actual image data [yes, it's rare we get such strong colours in
nature - but look at those strong yellows on the Fuji Lanovia test
transp' for example].

By that, I mean that the areas of high gamut colour [inside scanner
<space> but outside the WS] - which previously contained tonal
differentiation are now clipped to the same value, I've see it in
backlit leaves. If the WS is too small [as ARGB often is from a wide
gamut scanner (if I may call it that)] this tonal info is now gone -
whatever the output device. If that tonal separation had been
preserved, it could have been used in printing - with careful
targetting and the infinitely more sensitive conversion we get when
going WS > Output space.

I agree it's rare to see the difference in prints - but why not hald
all the data unclipped 'til output since we can??

Regards

NeilB

- - - - Consulting in Imaging & Colour Management - - - -
custom scanner and printer profiles, training on Trident & Imacon Scanning
- - - - - we supply Gretag and eyeOne, also XRite & OptiCal - - - - - -
p:44 (0)1273 774704 m:44 (0)7778 160201 http://www.neilbarstow.co.uk/
http://www.apple.com/uk/creative/neilbarstow/
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

References: 
 >Re: RGB Color Space Info Request (From: "Andrew Rodney" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Eye-One Pro and Profilemaker 4 Emissive Meaurement Errors (PC Platform)
  • Next by Date: Re: More ONYX Groans...
  • Previous by thread: Re: RGB Color Space Info Request
  • Next by thread: Re: RGB Color Space Info Request
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread