What is so funny about shooting two images in daylight with different color spaces?
What will this prove? If sRGB is preferred by more people, the same number of people, then sRGB is a valid color management system for photography. If AdobeRGB blows it away, then all of your work (calibrating your camera!) taking many tests under many conditions, using just the right paper, etc. won't matter because AdobeRGB is the hands-down color path to stunningly better color.
This test won't work for you, I get it. But it needs to be done to shed some light on if it is really worthwhile to have to shoot in AdobeRGB to preserve the rich color detail you're saying. People should decide if it is worth it or not, when choosing a workflow.
I had no idea that, "your regular commercial camera doesn't have accurate colors at all". Have you alerted Canon or Nikon or Sony? Are they not accurate at all? Will Crockett is wrong, Ken Rockwell is wrong, I'm wrong, and now the camera manufacturers are all making cameras with no accurate color "at all"?
You can be interviewed or not, I'm going to read these comments on the video. I think it would just be better if you got on screen and told us what was wrong with our results. I some idea how the test is going to go, but I'm not declaring anything here until the results come in.
Not sure what you found funny, but calibrating camera is my daily job right now so I studied the relevant math, algorithms and wrote software to do that.
In the process, I compared to existing cameras and their JPEG output and learned why there was so much difference where things were supposed to be the same.
Learning about color science is a long process I believe, and countless times I realized that what I thought was correct was either wrong or a gross approximation, no doubt it will happen again.
I'm sure it's part of the learning process.
Why do you see this as sRGB
VS Adobe RGB?
That doesn't make any sense, the whole premise here is inadequate.
There's not a lesser color space and a better one, both are for different usages.
sRGB is useful in a non color managed environment and introduce less banding when you're limited to only 8-bit, Adobe RGB gives a little more headroom and wider coverage that gets handy if you output on a device that has wider than Rec.709 / sRGB gamut.
Also, IMHO both are so limited they're completely outdated and it's very much the time to upgrade to wider gamuts for shooting, edition and display.
Incoming standards are Rec.2020 and also HDR displays, and instead most people are looking in the past.
Today we have dozen of millions of AMOLED displays on consumer products with gamut much wider than anything discussed here so far. It's not even about tomorrow: Its real since the Galaxy S, 5 years ago.
About your test, the methodology is indeed invalid.
You can test one variable at a time.
Either:
- Calibrated camera in sRGB against Adobe RGB -> calibrated printer -> eyes
Or:
- Camera in calibrated RAW -> Output in sRGB against Adobe RGB -> calibrated printer -> eyes
In your experiment, you have too many variables.
- Uncablibrated camera is a variable
- sRGB or Adobe RGB is a variable
- Uncalibrated printer is a variable
The logic says: you cannot test three variables in a single test.
And yes that's correct, digital cameras are not calibrated.
Well, to be more precise: All of them are calibrated (with more or less accuracy), then a custom look is applied.
This is the reason why often one can identify an untouched picture from a Sony camera (tends to have a cold tone), Panasonic camera (typically: muted yellows turning greens), Olympus (vibrant pleasing colors most people like out of the box). Canon look is pretty significant too.
I don't need to alter them their colors are not accurate, it's intentional and most of the time a visual trademark.
Well if you want me to talk in a video why not, that could be fun.
Know that I will have no problem identifying and describing methodologies and misconception in a test tho, I don't care if you use my name, people know me for my work and results already.