Photoshop's use of monitor profile
in [Photoshop]
|
Prev: Photoshop CS2 error: No more virtual tiles can be allocated
Next: how to create mythbuster type of letters
From: Bill Hilton on 20 Jun 2005 09:56 >Johan W. Elzenga writes ... > >You'd need to have a program that can graphically display >color profiles. I have two programs to do this, including Chromix Color Think ... >Then you can compare the color space (i.e. the profile) of your >monitor to sRGB color space. The difference between the two is the >difference you'll get with non-color managed applications. It's not practical to do this though ... first the programs I've used do the 3D graphs in LAB instead of RGB and it's very tough to do the translation between color modes in your head. Second, even if the contours of the spheres of the graphed profiles were an exact match it still wouldn't mean the colors inside the spheres map directly one-to-one for several reasons, the most obvious being that an abstract non-device specific 'working space' like sRGB is by definition perfectly gray balanced while a device specific profile for something like a monitor is almost never gray balanced (there are other reasons but this is the most obvious). Bill
From: Johan W. Elzenga on 20 Jun 2005 11:44 Bill Hilton <bhilton665(a)aol.com> wrote: > >You'd need to have a program that can graphically display > >color profiles. > > I have two programs to do this, including Chromix Color Think ... > > >Then you can compare the color space (i.e. the profile) of your > >monitor to sRGB color space. The difference between the two is the > >difference you'll get with non-color managed applications. > > It's not practical to do this though ... first the programs I've used > do the 3D graphs in LAB instead of RGB and it's very tough to do the > translation between color modes in your head. Second, even if the > contours of the spheres of the graphed profiles were an exact match it > still wouldn't mean the colors inside the spheres map directly > one-to-one for several reasons, the most obvious being that an abstract > non-device specific 'working space' like sRGB is by definition > perfectly gray balanced while a device specific profile for something > like a monitor is almost never gray balanced (there are other reasons > but this is the most obvious). Of course. But the graphs will tell you where the biggest differences are. I use a Macintosh, so I have ColorSync Utility for this (which does a 2D graph in RGB) and it certainly gives you an idea. But I agree; it's not much more than an idea. -- Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
From: Paul N on 20 Jun 2005 14:51 I would like to thank Bill and all other contributors for sharing your insights on this complex issue. The principle is not so difficult to grasp in theory but the implementation on Windows seems to be a mess of bolted-on bits & pieces, resulting in all kinds of behaviors that are not well documented. A show stopper for those who make their first steps into color management. Maybe that's a reason why graphical art people stick to their Macs? On the Mac it seems to be implemented like it should. What's holding Bill G to do the same? Paul
From: Hecate on 20 Jun 2005 20:05 On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:20:34 GMT, yesnno(a)att.net wrote: >There was a time many would recommend using a Mac over a PC for >"serious" graphics work. Are those days all but gone? On a Mac with >Intel chips (soon), will the user see any difference in how colors are >handled? Yes. No, it'll just work more slowly ;-) -- Hecate - The Real One Hecate(a)newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
From: Hecate on 20 Jun 2005 20:07
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:51:42 +0200, "Paul N" <paul2n.replace-2-by-1(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >I would like to thank Bill and all other contributors for sharing your >insights on this complex issue. The principle is not so difficult to grasp >in theory but the implementation on Windows seems to be a mess of bolted-on >bits & pieces, resulting in all kinds of behaviors that are not well >documented. A show stopper for those who make their first steps into color >management. I have never had any problem with it. I prefer that Windows doesn't stick it's nose into my colour management system. >Maybe that's a reason why graphical art people stick to their Macs? On the >Mac it seems to be implemented like it should. What's holding Bill G to do >the same? > Maybe ten years ago. Nowadays I come across far more graphics PCs than graphics Macs. -- Hecate - The Real One Hecate(a)newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money you don't have, to impress people you don't like... |