• 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: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.


  • Subject: Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
  • From: "email@hidden" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:01:33 -0400

Hi Uli,

There are very good technical reasons for gamma 2.2 as a native response. These reasons long pre-date the Mac and PC battle. I am NOT trying to change your mind on this issue, because frankly, from the standpoint of the Mac, you are right. Once they moved all their media players to that mode, the die was cast.

Rather than call the PC a gamma 2.2 platform and a Mac a gamma 1.8 platform, I would call a PC a gamma-do-nothing platform, and Mac a gamma 1.8 transfrom platform. In a very grotesque fashion, Apple is actually pseudo color managing all the media. Lets take a closer look at this:

Gamma 2.2 comes from two primary standards Rec 709 which had a 2.2 gamma assumption and now has a "gamma" like transfer function proposed for output from video cameras. sRGB borrowed the Rec 709 primaries and introduced a slightly different transfer function that basically follows a gamma 2.2 intent. There is a native gamma 2.2-like assumption for both still and motion video (but they differ a bit in the details) . Displays are generally set to around gamma 2.2 native, so the "gamma-do-nothing" strategy works pretty well.

The two predominant specifications for digital video are divided by High Definition (Rec. 709) and Standard Definition( Rec .601? I am not sure that I have that spec number correct and I am not in the US today). These two specifications have slightly different primary assumptions and slightly different transfer functions, but both transfer functions are close to gamma 2.2 in application. All moving media use a basic gamma 2.2 assumption. Apple's committement to gamma 1.8 means that they must basically change the transfer function in all applications that import video content to gamma 1.8. This would also imply that all applications, must convert from Mac Gamma to some assumed gamma or transfer function based upon the media when exporting. So we have here a platform that universally must "touch" every piece of content that passes through it.

Now here's the problem: if you are going to "touch" the content, then you must touch it with great care. What we have learned from HD digital video, standard def digital , and sRGB is that simple gamma manipulation used multiple times will degrade the image, particularly in 24 bit rgb. Each of these media, deal with the problem in a different way, by introducing a linear portion in the dark areas that converts unambigously via look up table and is also invertable via look up table, so there is no digital roundoff or clipping with each subsequent operation. More power to Apple if they are doing this, but given the diffuseness in their technology across so many different groups, I really do doubt that this is being handled universally correctly. A transform to simple gamma 1.8 will, by definition, quantize the shadow detail. This means that multiple editing sessions of the same media will degrade the image.

So for the simple user, it might make sense, but for the pro, it IS a real issue. Now I hope you better understand the technical reluctance to move the product to gamma 1.8 . For a platform that emphasizes media, holding on to Gamma 1.8 is an odd choice.

Regards,
Tom Lianza.






Uli Zappe wrote:

Am 19.04.2008 um 19:13 schrieb Uli Zappe:

If everything worked reproducibly (between different applications etc.), then a few options wouldn't heard anybody.


uhm, that's "Hurt", not "heard" ...  - sorry!

            Bye
                    Uli
________________________________________________________

  Uli Zappe, Solmsstraße 5, D-65189 Wiesbaden, Germany
  http://www.ritual.org
  Fon: +49-700-ULIZAPPE
  Fax: +49-700-ZAPPEFAX
________________________________________________________



_______________________________________________ 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
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
      • From: Nipat Paiboonponpong <email@hidden>
    • Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
      • From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
    • Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
      • From: Uli Zappe <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments. (From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments. (From: Uli Zappe <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments. (From: Uli Zappe <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Designers, Color Management, and Xrite , some thoughts and comments.
  • Next by Date: Re: The problems of reviews... (X-Rite CM)
  • 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):
    • Date
    • Thread