Printing Neon Blue?

[digitaldog]

Looking at the cloud of colors it seems these blues are almost literally against the envelope of prophotorgb. There is to my knowledge nothing that can reproduce that, no disply, no print. Nor is there a camera that can capture that. This is a synthetically created result.

I'll simply point out that:
1. The plot I provided doesn't show ProPhoto RGB.
2. Cameras do not have a color gamut.
What is clear is: there are device values in the image provided that fall outside the gamut of the printer profile I used in those gamut plots.

[BobDavid]

As for the mechanics of normal human vision, sensation, perception, cognition , Dan Flavin's fluorescent bulb installations are challenging. Meaning, they are not at all subtle and are often brutal.

Upon exiting a Flavin installation, one's color perception is out of whack.  The decay rate of retinal bleaching varies somewhat from one person to another.

I think the best way to capture Flavin's blue gallery light show is to print your photo as a large negative image. Put a black dot in the center of the print and instruct the viewer to fill his/her field of vision with the print while staring at the dot for at least 60 seconds. Then instruct the viewer to look away, blink his/her eyes while peering onto a white wall.  Presto: Dan Flavin blue shall reappear.

[SanderKikkert]

Allthough the technical issue put forward and discussed here is fascinating I can't help but think it's rather wonderful and reassuring in a sense that some works (of art) simply can not be reproduced in a way that would make it possible to fully appreciate them (or not  by any other means than checking them out in person.  Of course depending on whether you'd like to have your retinas bleached or not.

Regards, Sander

[BobDavid]

Back in the day when Flavin's art was considered avant garde, artists had their works photographed on slide film. I once saw 4 X 5 chromes of Dan's work sitting on a light table. Transparencies (35mm slides projected and sheet film chromes) represents his work far better than print. The same for Turrell and Piene.

[JRSmit]

I'll simply point out that:
1. The plot I provided doesn't show ProPhoto RGB.
2. Cameras do not have a color gamut.
What is clear is: there are device values in the image provided that fall outside the gamut of the printer profile I used in those gamut plots.

Andrew i am award that prophotorgb is not show.  The contour of the cloud of colors looks like it fits in prophotorgb,  at least that was my first reaction.

Whether camera's have a color gamut or not is something for another thread perhaps. They are limited in what they can capture.

[digitaldog]

Andrew i am award that prophotorgb is not show.  The contour of the cloud of colors looks like it fits in prophotorgb,  at least that was my first reaction.
Whether camera's have a color gamut or not is something for another thread perhaps. They are limited in what they can capture.

Here are the facts: The image plotted falls (fits) within ProPhoto RGB because it was encoded in ProPhoto RGB. As to the boundaries of the image data and ProPhoto RGB, you'll have to plot the image and those boundaries to see how close they are! Next, digital cameras (and scanners) do not have a color gamut. No new discussion necessary, it's been discussed here and elsewhere before.

http://www.color-image.com/2012/08/a-digital-camera-does-not-have-a-color-gamut/