Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
- Subject: Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point
- From: Mark Stegman <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 14:47:55 +1100
Andrew,
I have seen your video and I do have some issues with it but I'll have to
let it pass for now. I know what you are getting at as I have worked with a
multitude of devices over the years. All I am saying is what I see in high
volume production houses. Not art houses. In general, I do not have an
issue with the validity of your method but I still don't understand why you
want to work in a colour space that hardly any device can reproduce
including wide gamut monitors.
> > I find the main reason people use AdobeRGB is because they have been told
> > bigger is better.
>
> Depending on the output, it most certainly is!
That's exactly what I'm saying however, most of the high volume digital
printing devices do NOT have a wide gamut. We're not talking about 11 or 12
colour inkjet printers here or even about contract proofing.
> I've got the prints to prove it.
...and so have I but I was also talking about the relevance to cross media
publishing where the primary concern is some sort of consistency across the
different platforms, not getting the most 'faithful' or most colourful
rendering. In this environment you are constrained by the 'lowest common
denominator'. The priority here is that the images are 'good enough' to
match across a host of devices, some colour managed, some not, that will be
viewed under a range of conditions. It's a bitter pill to swallow for those
of us who have put so much into making ICC colour management work but
that's the way it is. Not the way we would like it.
I've got a file to prove it to (question, do you have an output device
> which will greatly suffer using sRGB)? You can prove it to yourself with
> the file and a decent output device:
>
Done it many times over. I also have devices on which these wider gamut
spaces are just wasted.
>
> The benefits of wide gamut working spaces on printed output:
>
NOT including high-speed commercial offset.
>
> This three part, 32 minute video covers why a wide gamut RGB working space
> like ProPhoto RGB can produce superior quality output to print.
>
>
All well and good but the problem is that high volume production houses do
not have the time for it. They are already an endangered species. They want
OPTIMUM quality that is predictable and consistent on a range of devices,
not necessarily 'high' quality, at least not as we know it. Their margins
are already paper thin (pardon the pun). It's just not an option for
economic viability. How many newspapers would do this? They just dismantled
the biggest presses here and literally sent them for scrap! It's called
'horses for courses'. Remember, I'm not talking about high quality
photographic prints of archival quality. Relatively speaking, that's a
niche market.
In summary, a system is only as good as it's weakest link. If it was hi-fi
sound you would not connect $10k speakers to a $50 amp. Most images aren't
even being shot on what we would consider pro equipment these days. Our
'entry level' CANON 5Ds has supplanted the medium format studio cameras
because the majority of the images either go online and or into a catalogue
printed on coated toilet paper. The means has to be justified by the end
result.
Regards,
Mark
_______________________________________________
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
| References: | |
| | >Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Graeme Gill <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Lars Borg <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Steve Upton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Mark Stegman <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Lars Borg <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Mark Stegman <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Mark Stegman <email@hidden>) |