sRGB is a great gamut, never mind who wrote it. I was surprised to measure the gamut on my daughter MacBookPro to find that the primaries on her tiny, little 13" screen were smack on the sRGB primaries. Maybe some people here don't like the term "sRGB", isn't Rec709 the same? The fact that it was crafted at a time where the only game in town was CRT does not deter in anyway on its usefulness as a "working space", as Adobe calls it. Would you believe I still regularly have arguments over which is better between ColorMatchRGB and sRGB/AdobeRGB? Die-hard Mac photographers. Something that was created 30 years ago is not necessarily bad or outdated, take the 1931 Standard Observer, still going strong after almost 100 years. / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users <colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com> On Behalf Of Andrew Rodney via colorsync-users Sent: December 2, 2019 6:58 PM To: Wire ~ via colorsync-users <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: Re: NEC PA271Q "Native" chromaticities
On Dec 2, 2019, at 4:44 PM, Wire ~ via colorsync-users <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> wrote:
My current peeve is the denigration of sRGB. It's a color-space that makes so much sense.
Well it did in circa 1994 or so (with CRTs). I don't see what it brings to the party today. And far, far too many urban legends surrounding it.
And I'm super excited about new wide-gamut displays, and more color.
More? Maybe wider gamut which is nothing really that new. Even on iPhone and iPad. Anyway, for those of us still printing, you can't do much worse than sRGB ;-} Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/ <http://www.digitaldog.net/>