Henry, I'm not a digital camera designer but what don't you understand about the fact that a camera is a sophisticated "light detection system"? It's pretty much a color measuring instrument (others could correct me) but an i1pro does not have a "gamut" per se or a filter-based colorimeter, they take light in and spit out numbers in response -- same with digital cameras, they take light in and spit out sets of RGB numbers. Surely there's a lot of math going on inside the CPU of a Nikon or a Canon or a SONY camera, like estimation of scene illuminant by which tonal responses are likely adjusted. There may very well be some kind of "model" of various 'natural scenes' because, just like during the creation of output profiles, it helps to have some kind of "assumptions" as to what ranges of colors or luminances are to be expected. But is that a"gamut" per se? A gamut is a physical construct, it comes from something measurable that have "limits". I hope that helps... / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users <colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com> On Behalf Of Henry Davis via colorsync-users Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 4:45 PM To: colorsync-users@lists.apple.com Subject: Re: Humans (and cameras and scanners) do not have a color gamut (?) When the “cameras absolutely do not have gamuts” quote moves from “some response” of a camera to “color accuracy” I get lost. It sounds as though there is a ruler(the display) measuring a non-dimensional entity for accuracy. The quote seems to assume that the camera has infinite perfection but it’s up to some mysterious other entity to prove that it doesn’t have infinite perfection. I’m now losing my fight to understand - I was pretty much following the previous threads about the distinction between color and numbers but this curve ball has me swinging and missing. I believe the quote was supposed to bring some clarity but it didn’t work for me. Maybe there’s another way to explain not having a gamut that will help. Henry Davis