On Jan 13, 2020, at 7:14 PM, Henry Davis via colorsync-users <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> wrote:
Is not a gamut a limit?
The discussion here is color gamut. Color gamut defines a range of colors. Even more specifically (not that it should be necessary after so many days of this) but one more example: https://color.viewsonic.com/explore/content/Color-gamut_6.html “The color gamut describes a range of color within the spectrum of colors that are identifiable by the human eye (visible color spectrum)“.
Restricting gamut to certain coordinte systems doesn’t make it any less a limit. Restricting ‘gamut’ to a jargon definition doesn’t erradicate ‘gamut’ as an applicable term for describing color bounds or capabilities.
Color gamut has a limit based on what is and isn’t color. Absolutely not joking and fact: I had a dog who’s name was Gamut. He had absolutely nothing to do with color gamut.
Gamut is a broader term than it has been reduced to by some in this thread.
We don’t need a broader term for color gamut, just color gamut and it’s well established and excepted (by most) definition. There’s yet another above.
Sorry if this doesn’t fit the model for some color scientists but that’s the way it goes.
Many color scientists have stated the facts about color gamut and the lack thereof from input devices like digital cameras.
If a group wants to own language then they’re bound to run into ignorant people like me. It’s the price you pay for ownership.
I don’t speak for the group or anyone but myself but you'll hear some posters speak for others. I am very clear on my understanding on color gamut because my understanding comes from a pretty significant number of color scientists and experts and all agree; I’ve copied and pasted their text which, much of which was paramount in my understanding of color gamut. Unlike just a few here, disagreeing with so many esteemed and well respected experts on color is way over my pay grade. I absolutely agree with Graeme: That topic has been cleared up over and over again. Andrew Rodney http://www.digitaldog.net/ <http://www.digitaldog.net/>
Henry Davis
On Jan 13, 2020, at 8:54 PM, Graeme Gill via colorsync-users <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> wrote:
Henry Davis via colorsync-users wrote:
The threads I’ve been reading here have insisted that sensors do not have gamuts. No one has yet to clear up this contradiction.
That topic has been cleared up over and over again. I'm not sure that repeating the information will improve comprehension, but here's another short summary:
If by "gamut" you mean a well defined volume of tri-stimulus space, then no, input devices don't have gamuts. This is due to the nature of the many-to-one spectral to tri-stimulus transform that they perform allowing for colors that can be be accurately captured if having one spectra, but not being accurately captured if they have another.
If by "gamut" you mean that they have limits, then yes, input devices have limits. Just not of the sort that can be defined by a volume of tri-stimulus space.
That's it. You can stop wondering if sensors have gamuts.
Graeme Gill.
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. colorsync-users mailing list (colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/andrew%40digitaldog....
This email sent to andrew@digitaldog.net