Re: Safari color management
Re: Safari color management
- Subject: Re: Safari color management
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:46:29 -0700
on 11/4/04 12:28 PM, Roger Howard wrote:
>
> I agree, there needs to be a consistent approach to color management.
> I'm not positive that today "assuming" monitor profile is dumb; I think
> it's an unfortunate necessity, at least until *everything* is color
> managed the same way.
It's totally dumb (sorry). This takes us back to Photoshop 4 days when all
numbers were sent directly to the display. Everyone saw different previews
from the same numbers. It's chaos. Instead we can now produce a specific
flavor of RGB, make an assumption about it if untagged (sRGB) and everyone
with a good display profile will see the same numbers the same way. Assuming
monitor RGB ensures that everyone is working with a highly device dependent
color space (their unique display) instead of a Quasi-Device Independent
color space like sRGB.
> Agreed. But it's not just images; it's HTML colored elements, Quicktime
> movies, Windows Media streams, Flash animations, and all the rest that
> will *have* to be consistent rendered with the same color mgmt policy
> as everything else.
Doable but let's start with images.
> I disagree; if all we had on the Web today were JPEGs (and HTML had no
> color elements itself) then this would be effective today.
Everything you see on a computer be it a JPEG or an HTML page is just a big
pile of numbers. That's all computers understand. If you want color from an
element (be it a whole bunch of colored pixels making up an image or a solid
graphic), you've got to make some specific numbers. Numbers don't tell us
what a color looks like without a descriptor. That's a profile. You can
assume all elements (groups of numbers) that have no descriptor is sRGB and
if indeed the elements were made with that assumption, we'll all see those
numbers correctly (the display calibration and profile play a role here of
course).
I'm not a fan of sRGB but the one thing it is good for is this lowest common
dominator for assumed color of numbers. Let's use it for what it's good for.
For those who simply have no idea about color management and display
profiling (the vast majority on a PC), sRGB isn't going to look too bad.
Again, another reason why an OS that assumes a 2.2 gamma makes more sense
then one that assumes 1.8.
Andrew Rodney
http://digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden