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: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 14:28:23 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
Uli Zappe wrote:
>Movies and the GUI look *terrible* with a gamma 2.2 on a Mac.
Uli,
I don't know which movies you are watching, but the ones I play on my Macintosh and view through my display -- calibrated at gamma 2.2 -- look terrific.
Maybe your DVDs are dirty or sumpin'...? :-)
>Now explain a non-expert why a product that is supposed to improve
>color quality on his Mac seemingly does the very opposite in two
>areas that become immediately obvious
I wish to echo my dear friend Mark Segal in warning people about the too-liberal use of the word "obvious" when referring to something that isn't.
It's far from "obvious" to me that there are such problems as you state when using the Macintosh GUI/OS.
>2. Keep in mind that one argument for the ColorMunki is its ability to
>profile projectors. Why do you profile projectors? Mostly for a better
>DVD quality in your home cinema. Only that your DVDs now will look
>horrible if you use a Mac. Please...
Same comment about the use of "horrible" as for "obvious". Please see above. :-)
>3. Prosumers who are willing to spend $500 for better color are most
>likely connoisseurs. As such, they might have bought their Mac for,
>among other things, the aesthetic quality of the GUI. This quality is
>completely ruined by a gamma of 2.2.
"Completely"? The breadth of overstatement is surprising.
>4. If anything, color management should make the requirement to use a
>specific gamma outdated, because a color-managed image looks OK on
>both 1.8 and 2.2 systems. So how is color management an argument to
>willingly go against the default value of a platform, evoking all
>kinds of issues?
In the words of someone much better than myself at explaining such things, the late Bruce Fraser:
"[W]e recommend that you calibrate your monitor to a gamma of 2.2, for the simple reason that, in all our testing, we've found that calibrating to around gamma 2.2 produces the smoothest display of gradients, with little or no visible banding or posterization."
(Fraser, Murphy and Bunting, "Real World Color Management", 2003, page 135)
Incidentally, most of the web is aimed at PC users, whose systems use... (I'll be durn) ...gamma 2.2!
>Sorry, Andrew, a product supposed to improve colors that immediately
>makes the GUI of the whole operating system and all DVDs and movies
>look ugly as hell may be all kinds of things, intuitive it is most
>definitely not.
And I myself am sorry to say that your argument is quite overstated ("ugly as hell"? "completely"? "obvious"?), besides unconvincing to me in any practical sense that I have become familiar with in my almost 20 years as an imaging professional.
Best regards.
Marco Ugolini
_______________________________________________
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
- Prev by Date:
Re: Photographers, printers, and proofs
- Next by Date:
Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- Previous by thread:
Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- Next by thread:
Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
- Index(es):