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: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:19:07 -0700
> On Feb 27, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Roger Breton <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> You are 100% right, Mr. Rodney. We can agree that, in the world of RGB spaces, some were designed for very specific purposes while some were derived straight from actual display devices like ColormatchRGB. Why couldn't the same logic apply in CMYK spaces?
Case in point would be having a device like a Radius Pressview behave outside it's defined parameters that define ColorMatch RGB (by altering gamma, white point or chromatsity) would no longer make that ColorMatch RGB. Just as a ProPhoto RGB set of primaries with a 2.2 TRC isn't ProPhoto RGB (it's been named MelissaRGB). Now take your press. If any single attribute differs, say the paper itself, it no longer is the synthetic color space behavior you asked for, the entire system falls a bit apart. Now instead we define specifications based on REAL, actual output using all the parameters together (much like the simple three that define an RGB working space). IF eveyone follows those specifications, all is fine. The second you alter anything, the specifications of a real or synthetic color space change. So, you your so called synthetic CMYK space converted from RGB. And the dot gain changes or the paper white is slighlty different, or the press conditions change as we know they can and do.
RGB working space are really simple in their definition and are NOT based on actual device behaviors per se. No device can produce ProPhoto RGB as far as I know. Change even the ambient conditions under which an idealized sRGB display (or using something that isn't a P22 phosphor set), you really no longer have sRGB but maybe something close.
What did IDEAlliance has do with ISO-15339 that is different in design than what was done for TR001? A press or number of presses were forced to conform to a set of conditions to produce a known colorimetric set of output values they agreed upon. If the values do not match (and within what value?) when is this no longer SO-15339 and in what way is this syntnetic? I believe and could be totally wrong, that what the ISO did is nothing fundamentally different from what was done in the past with say SWOPV2/TR001: define a set of conditions which should produce a set of colorimetric values upon output. That's a specification. You follow it or you don't. There's nothing synthetic about it.
Maybe this is just semantics. But I see RGB working space as simple, easily defined and based on synthetic behavior, not actual behavior which is easy to do for an editing space and perhaps impossible for an output color space. These Quasi-Device Independent spaces are not tied to your display or printer, they are tied to the synthetic values their creators built into a spec.
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
| References: | |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: John Lund <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Karsten Krüger <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: G Mike Adams <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: G Mike Adams <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: G Mike Adams <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: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>) |
| | >RE: Silly question department, Display Media White Point (From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>) |