Not from profile, but from file that includes the profile. There is a big dfference.
The LUT is calibration stuff. It is not part of the color space profile, as I said. In a file containing a profile you can add propetary tag and save additional information.
The LUT is loaded and then managed by videocard, what is Windows color role? None.
You're making pointless arguments to try to avoid looking foolish now. The LUT data is not merely included in the monitor profile, loading it correctly is essential to ensure the profile is valid. If the LUT data is not loaded into the video card, the profile is meaningless, because the monitor is in a different state than when the profiling measurements were taken.
But you don't explain how is possible to
"make the monitor interpret all RGB images as sRGB."
the true black magic.
First of all, you are misquoting me. The complete sentence I wrote was "Windows uses the color profile to
kinda-sorta make the monitor interpret all RGB images as sRGB." And I bloody well did explain what I was talking about, too, how the LUT data in the video card sets the desired BP, WP, and gamma curve, and enforces R=G=B neutrality, and how most monitors are designed to approximate sRGB, and all that, as you appear to be trying to rebut below:
Things went a litle different. HP designed sRGB color space and HP and Microsoft promote the use of this color space. The idea was that if all the monitor color space are the same, all people see the same colors. Industry follows and most monitors are nearly sRGB. Of course if you successfully calibrate your monitor you can have a better rendition, but to see correctly an image with RGB values in some other color space you need a transform from the image color space to the monitor color space.
I never said that calibration alone makes a monitor follow sRGB exactly, just that it will generally get you fairly close (the "kinda-sorta" bit you keep leaving out); not perfect, but a big improvement over doing nothing with the monitor at all. Calibration gets you close, then profile + color managed app gets you the rest of the way to accurate colors.
Sorry, the owner of the profile uses PhotoShop. I use PhotoResampling, my own product. I have a complete control of CMM. I converted blue from sRGB to monitor profile and get violet. Your hypothesis is not good for the specific case. Other people partecipating in forum see the same blue-violet problem. So my diagnosys was correct. Inspecting the profile I found a confirm: blue primary has a "strange" position in CIE_xy space.
That case has nothing to do with the OP's situation, so why do you keep bringing it up? I've already demonstrated that your test doesn't prove a bad profile anyway, depending on the specifics of the situation.
A spectrophotometer is only a component of profiling kit, a fundamental one.But, for example, it must profiling not obstructing the ambient illumination which must be included to obtain accurate measurements of veiling glare. Software is fundamental too. Profiling kit are not so perfect as you think.
Gamut mapping is done if profile do it. A color managed application do convert from image profile to monitor profile. Wat do you mean by when gamut mapping is NOT done (simple viewing.... ?
In any case, I'm not sure that craigwashburn profile is wrong. Without image and profile it is only a hypothesis.
It seems that you trust so much in profiling tool that discard anywhay the hypothesis. That is the difference.
You really have some weird ideas about monitor profiling. Every monitor measuring device I've ever seen is designed to block glare from ambient light sources from reaching the part of the monitor where measurements ate being taken, because it is impossible to get meaningful measurement readings through a glare. The more advanced tools (like Eye-One spectro) allow a separate reading of ambient light color temp and intensity to account for ambient light's effect on the monitor image, but measuring through a glare is outright foolish. With cheaper, more poorly designed devices that fail to block the glare well, (the original Colorvision Spyder was quite bad in this regard) dimming or extinguishing the lights completely is the only way to get a reasonably accurate monitor profile.
I've already explained why a bad profile and bad measuring device at much less likely than a monitor issue. But just to humor you, I'll reiterate:
If the measurement device was bad, the probability is high that other monitors calibrated and profiled with the same device would exhibit similar symptoms. But they do not. Therefore, the measuring device is probably good.\
Since the measuring device is most likely good, and multiple attempts were made at profiling, all with similar results, the profile is probably good as well. A single measurement error wouldn't cause the same problem in multiple profiles.
Similarly, if the problem was user error, it is likely that one or more of his other machines would be having color management difficulties.
A narrow-gamut monitor situation fits all of the problem criteria specified. The result is consistent in spite of numerous attempts to reprofile. No other monitors exhibit the undesired behavior. And converting image RGB to monitor RGB values in a color-managed app is done with Relative Colorimetric rendering intent, which converts all out-of-gamut colors to the nearest in-gamut color without doing the gamut mapping that happens with Perceptual rendering intent (desaturating in-gamut colors to make room for out-of-gamut colors).
The most effective process for troubleshooting problems is to start with the most likely cause, either confirm or rule it out, and go on on to the next most likely cause if necessary.
