Most consumers don't need to (and shouldn't, and won't) worry about this, and they're not supposed to. Tech companies have done a lot of things to try to accomplish color correctness across devices without user intervention. Display profiles are automatically created based on information in the display, some displays have builtin self adjustment to make up for changes in temperature or aging over time, and printer drivers often include profiles automatically selected for different types of paper. That provides more color accuracy than most people would even notice. So just using devices without even thinking about this stuff is ideal, and not just for consumers. Artists too don't need to think about these things for the most part. It's a matter of how picky you want to be about color, and even then it's mostly about the really saturated colors. There are some colors in the real world that are outside the gamut of sRGB, not a lot but some, which is why Photoshop created Adobe RGB, and other people have created other color spaces and profiles to describe them. These spaces can describe more colors, and their endpoints (chromaticities) can be slightly shifted relative to sRGB. What that gets you is the ability to reproduce more saturated colors, or colors that are shifted one way or the other like more orange reds, or more purple reds. Take a picture of a very red flower in direct sunlight, or a very saturated cyan object. Those images on your display won't look the same, exactly, as you saw them directly. It's not a question of brightness, but deepness of color. Even if you captured those with a huge gamut profile, chances are your display just can't reproduce some of those colors. The physical materials which emit and transmit light in the display have different optical properties than the physical material of the original object illuminated by its environment. It'll still look like a red flower. Just not exactly as red as the actual flower in sunlight.