Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 69
Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 69
- Subject: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 69
- From: Gerry Yaeger <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 19:32:15 -0700
I think trying to convert Mr. Robinson falls under the same category as try to teach a pig to sing. "It wastes the farmers time and pisses off the pig."
Regards,
Gerry Yaeger
www.TheDigitalCoach.com
Now offering web based training.
On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:59 PM, email@hidden wrote:
> Send Colorsync-users mailing list submissions to
> email@hidden
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> email@hidden
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> email@hidden
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Colorsync-users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying. (Andrew Rodney)
> 2. Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying. (Ben Goren)
> 3. Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying. (Andrew Rodney)
> 4. Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance. (Ben Goren)
> 5. Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying. (Martin Orpen)
> 6. Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance. (John Gnaegy)
> 7. Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance. (John Gnaegy)
> 8. Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance. (John Gnaegy)
> 9. Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance. (John Gnaegy)
> 10. Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance. (Ben Goren)
> 11. Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying. (Anthony Sanna)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:14:58 -0600
> From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
> To: John Robinson <email@hidden>
> Cc: "email@hidden"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:12 PM, John Robinson <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> So the world viewing on un-calibrated screens are wrong and you are right.
>
> It depends on how the original data was created and handled, something you still don't seem to understand.
>
> Andrew Rodney
> http://www.digitaldog.net/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:21:03 -0700
> From: Ben Goren <email@hidden>
> To: John Robert Robinson <email@hidden>
> Cc: "email@hidden"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Jun 6, 2014, at 4:53 PM, John Robert Robinson <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Excluding print media, if no one viewing your calibration work is calibrated, what value is your calibration?
>
> I already addressed that. The display industry has, for the most part, adopted sRGB as something of a standard, and, mostly, new devices are and for some time have been factory calibrated to within shouting distance of sRGB. Therefore, if your own workflow is color managed, if you output your files as sRGB you'll be targeting results that roughly fall in line with what most devices mostly will display.
>
> If, on the other hand, your workflow is *not* color managed, then you'll be "baking" your deviation from standard into all your work. For example, if your display has an excessively high white point color temperature and your ambient light is incandescent, you may well overcompensate by making things yellower and redder than you otherwise would, and the majority of your viewers will wonder why your pictures have a "vintage" faded look to them.
>
> Will your images look perfect on all devices if you adopt an ideal managed workflow? No, of course not. As I mentioned, even _National_Geographic_ looks bad in dim incandescent light, and equally bad in cheap incandescent light. But they still carefully target the standards (which are, not coincidentally, a close proxy for daylight) and that's a big part of the reason why their reputation is what it deservedly is.
>
> Cheers,
>
> b&
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 801 bytes
> Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
> URL: <https://lists.apple.com/mailman/private/colorsync-users/attachments/20140606/a5ab9d09/attachment-0001.asc>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:21:21 -0600
> From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
> To: John Robert Robinson <email@hidden>
> Cc: "email@hidden"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Jun 6, 2014, at 5:53 PM, John Robert Robinson <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Excluding print media, if no one viewing your calibration work is calibrated, what value is your calibration?
>
> Actually there hasn't been a film, TV show, commercial etc in the last 15+ years that wasn't viewed on a calibrated system. That you don't care to view the data as close to the ideal as possible, provides the impression you are not a content provider. Mom and pop don't care how Iron Man was color corrected. The people who produced the film did care and they absolutely worked in a calibrated display condition. You want to view it on a dimly set iPhone in bright daylight? Knock yourself out. Filmmakers, photographers, graphic artists etc all care about the color they create.
>
> Andrew Rodney
> http://www.digitaldog.net/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:29:42 -0700
> From: Ben Goren <email@hidden>
> To: José Ángel Bueno García <email@hidden>
> Cc: "email@hidden List"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Jun 6, 2014, at 4:17 PM, José Ángel Bueno García <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Most of the users of the photography facilities have never seen a print (from an twelve inks inkjet printer) match a display, and I do that with low effort but with the necessary tools.
>
> Because of the radically different primaries, matching print and display is almost never going to happen...and, indeed, considering the significant non-overlapping gamuts in either direction, often not something to be desired.
>
> On the other hand, in art reproduction, matching original to copy is almost always achievable (within gamut and texture and gloss and resolution limitations, of course)...if you know what you're doing....
>
> Cheers,
>
> b&
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 801 bytes
> Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
> URL: <https://lists.apple.com/mailman/private/colorsync-users/attachments/20140606/f6417241/attachment-0001.asc>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 01:41:30 +0100
> From: Martin Orpen <email@hidden>
> To: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> On 7 Jun 2014, at 00:53, John Robert Robinson <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Excluding print media,
>
> Excluding print media, the majority of still images are next to worthless.
>
> High value images will end up being printed and the owners will have high expectations over reproduction quality and consistency.
>
> Expectations that only “calibrationists” will be able to meet :-)
>
> --
> Martin Orpen
> Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:54:26 -0700
> From: John Gnaegy <email@hidden>
> To: "email@hidden"
> <email@hidden>, John Robinson
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>> So if I measure white and it reads slight blue and red in the white my screen is lying?
>
> Displays are notorious liars.
>
> The numbers shown by the eyedropper in Photoshop are just numbers, not photons. That's the key. There's a whole lot of stuff between those numbers and the photons emitted by the display, or the photons reflected off a printed photograph.
>
> I used to have a CRT that would occasionally lose the entire green channel until I gave it a good thwack on the side.
>
> But what if instead it had gradually diminished the output of the green channel, just a little, getting worse over the course of a year. If that were my only display, I probably wouldn't notice it.
>
> If I had created a logo for Sam's Salmon Sanctuary, and in Photoshop made it look medium red (i.e., salmon), the eyedropper would show 255 190 128. Looks like salmon to me. Looks like peach to Sam.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:27:48 -0700
> From: John Gnaegy <email@hidden>
> To: John R <email@hidden>
> Cc: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>> So if you used your calibrated screen to create a specific color numbers, then everyone viewing your numbers would read like your screen?
>
> Halfway there. Both sides need to be calibrated.
>
> Let's say I finally notice my display doesn't output as much green as it should, and I calibrate the display. The calibration process outputs a display profile, and this display profile boosts the greens to make up for my flawed display. That profile is only relevant to my display, it only describes the variation between my display and some theoretical ideal.
>
> So I recreate the logo in Photoshop, with my new display profile tweaking my flawed display, and the eyedropper now says the numbers are 255 128 128. Perfect.
>
> Until I send that tiff to you. Because unfortunately, although you haven't noticed it, the blue channel in your display has been gradually increasing its midrange output over time. To you the eyedropper reads 255 128 128, but it doesn't look like a salmon at all, more like pink bubblegum.
>
> So you have to calibrate your display too, creating a profile that reduces the midrange reds to make up for the idiosyncracies of your display.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:31:05 -0700
> From: John Gnaegy <email@hidden>
> To: John R <email@hidden>, "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com'
> List" <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>
>> it only describes the variation between my display and some theoretical ideal.
>
> Well, more accurately, it describes and adjusts. Description is referred to as "characterization", adjustment is referred to as "calibration". The process usually accomplishes both, and the profile contains elements which do each.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:42:05 -0700
> From: John Gnaegy <email@hidden>
> To: John R <email@hidden>
> Cc: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>> creating a profile that reduces the midrange reds
>
> I meant to say, a profile that reduces the midrange blues to make up for your display which overdrives the midrange blues.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:47:21 -0700
> From: Ben Goren <email@hidden>
> To: John Gnaegy <email@hidden>
> Cc: "'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List"
> <email@hidden>, John R <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: There is no place for individual taste in screen
> appearance.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:27 PM, John Gnaegy <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> That profile is only relevant to my display, it only describes the variation between my display and some theoretical ideal.
>
> Just a nitpick: there isn't any "theoretical ideal" in the process, any more than there's a "theoretically ideal" throttle position in your car for 55 mph on a flat surface with no wind. So long as there aren't any discontinuities (i.e., instances where a larger number causes a dimmer output) and so long as the desired white point lies within the display's gamut and so long as there're enough bits for the resolution you want, anything else is equally valid.
>
> As a practical matter, the closer R=G=B=255 is to your desired white point, and the closer equal RGB values are to the neutral axis for that white point and spaced for the desired encoding gamma, the more likely the profiling software will be able to create an highly accurate characterization of the display and thus create an high quality profile. That's what calibration is designed to do: adjust voltages (perhaps manually with knobs according to on-screen guidance) or DAC lookup tables or that sort of thing so that a neutral evenly-spaced gray ramp sent down the display cable would actually look like a neutral evenly-spaced gray ramp.
>
> But even if you skip the calibration and go straight to profile construction, the profile will take care of mapping the actual neutral axis to whatever unequal RGB values are needed and so on. The profile will be more prone to banding or other quality-degrading artifacts, but that's an implementation problem and not a theoretical one.
>
> Cheers,
>
> b&
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 801 bytes
> Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
> URL: <https://lists.apple.com/mailman/private/colorsync-users/attachments/20140606/e4dcc050/attachment-0001.asc>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 01:59:08 +0000
> From: Anthony Sanna <email@hidden>
> To: "email@hidden"
> <email@hidden>
> Subject: Re: If it looks white on your uncalibrated display, yes it is
> lying.
> Message-ID: <email@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> So the world viewing on un-calibrated screens are wrong and you are right.
>
> 15-years ago, My work was in a hell of a mess. You see, up until that time all of my production ended up on a CMYK offset or rotogravure press - ink on paper - it was a singular workflow. I shot my transparencies, created my layouts, and turned it all over to an engraver who scanned the TX, shot the layout, put it all together on the films that burned the plates which picked up the ink and transferred it to paper or board for the finished product. Easy. I didn’t have to be an ammeter expert because the real experts did the work, at that time, in a rather cumbersome, closed-loop, color-managed way.
>
> Then the web arrived and sites needed images that glowed in phosphorescent colors, and commercial Lambda and inkjets became available to print enormous display prints with ever-expanding sets of chromatic dyes, and suddenly, everything I had done before became obsolete. I couldn’t take that 1-inch strawberry on the front of my package and put it on the web. Wrong size, wrong colorspace; the “numbers” were meaningless. The same was true when I needed a 4-foot berry for a convention display. That’s when my whole way of working changed. The key to it all was learning about and establishing a color-managed workflow with custom ICC profiles for press and screen (mine and the mom & pops) and scanners and large format printers. Colorsync was the key for making my label strawberry match my convention strawberry match my web strawberry.
>
> I think you have to look at the greater scope of what ColorSync has accomplished. It’s not “if it looks good on my MacBook it’ll be OK on Ma & Pa’s Dell because there are no standards”. There are standards, set by color scientists & engineers, who have come up with a method for translating color information from one paradigm to another reasonably well in a world of variable illuminants, viewers, and media.
>
>
> Tony
> -
> Anthony Sanna
> (608) 206-3134
> email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Colorsync-users mailing list
> email@hidden
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
>
> End of Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 11, Issue 69
> ***********************************************
_______________________________________________
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