Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- Subject: Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:07:35 -0600
- Thread-topic: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
On 4/19/08 11:13 AM, "Uli Zappe" wrote:
> If this is really the case, then I don't know why you bother about
> color at all. A bit too much magenta certainly does not corrupt the
> visual experience as much as a 2.2 gamma for a movie that's supposed
> to be 1.8.
All I'm telling you is that with my NEC Spectraview (a wide gamut unit),
video looks fine to me. Could it look better? Maybe.
> You could say exactly the same about Windows and gamma 1.8 (and you'd
> probably find that the issue would be much more pervasive there). It's
> not that gamma 2.2 is the "ideal" gamma value.
X-Rite could have just stuck with a native gamma for this audience and be
done. OR as I said, spent more useful time building an intelligent product
that would allow a swap from 1.8 to 2.2 (or better, built a common database
of applications that require one or the other and done the swap).
> I know that e.g. the
> authors of "Real World Color Management" think 2.2 is "the best" from
> a visual POV. Others argue 1.8 is superior, still others favor *L.
Just don't muck around here at all, stick to native. Why guess? And we all
know that a TRC 2.2 gamma is going to be a closer guess than 1.8. But it
doesn't matter really. Certainly not in ICC aware applications. Outside of
ICC aware applications, its all science fiction anyway.
> I would
> think it's a really shallow "solution" to actually provide a gamma
> option, but to avoid the name. How superficial can you get? If
> something has a precise name, then label it this way instead of giving
> some vague and opaque description.
This market doesn't know what Gamma is and doesn't need to know, that's the
point. All they want is better color matching. You can call it foobar if you
want. It should really be called "tone response" or "tone response curve"
rather than gamma since displays don't have a gamma but rather a TRC that
may or may not be defined with a gamma function. These users don't need to
go into this one iota. The software should just ask the display and move on.
If it detects and Apple display, it should be set to a TRC Gamma of 1.8
because that's the physical behavior Apple has placed in these units.
>> I'm not suggesting X-Rite not provide an option and lock users into
>> one setting!
>
> Ah, I thought you would, because that's what X-Rite was doing, and you
> strongly advocated against the change that Tom reported.
I'm suggesting, despite the calls of the beta testers (who should have known
at the time X-Rite was so deep into releasing a product, our concerns would
not be considered) that there's no reason to confuse this market using terms
like Gamma, and that they had the opportunity to make the entire process a
lot easier for this target market.
>> There's all kinds of other equally undesired and unnecessary areas
>> in the UI that could have moved such users past the old color
>> management mindset that WAS discussed by the beta testers
>
> Can you give an example? For my taste (as a color management
> outsider!) there's *too few* options in the ColorMunki, not too many.
> Actually, you hardly do anything more than click "Profile". How could
> this possibly still be reduced?
I have pages and pages sent to X-Rite during beta. Here's an example of just
one: Display Wizard, Easy versus Advanced. I¹m a new users who is targeted
to use this product. What¹s the difference in Easy Mode versus Advanced?
Which should I pick and why? Text: Please verify your display type below is
ALL you need to say here.
In Advanced, IF I click on Optimize the Luminance Level, Optimize Brightness
is also checked but if I uncheck this 2nd check box, the first remains.
Also, there¹s no clear understanding of what Optimize Brightness and
Luminance is, why do you have both? What is the user supposed to understand
here by the two terms (Brightness and Luminance)? Not only is the language
not clear, there¹s too much text and too many options for this audience.
Have Easy button, have Advanced Button. Advanced has ONE check box (Optimize
Luminance based on ambient light conditions) and Target White Point. That¹s
it. D65 should NOT say Default because unless you know for a fact that¹s
going to be correct 99 times out of 100, its not a default. Is it a
recommendation? You don¹t need the word Target here either. Just name the
popup ³White Point². Users either get it or they don¹t. And if D65 is the
default, why is it listed third in the list?
Andrew Rodney
http://www.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