Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 35   Go Down

Author Topic: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question  (Read 227706 times)

tgray

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #460 on: January 07, 2011, 06:10:48 pm »

This entire argument boils down to adaptation.  If you use adaptation, the blue is within Pro Photo, and if you don’t then it isn’t (or if you simply mess it up because you don’t realize what you’re doing on the calculator.)

Yay! We have a winner.

Again, not to put words in joofa's mouth, but I don't think he ever said, "I don't care about adaptation."  I think he was pointing out the case where you don't use it, as in his #1 of 4 cases.  Later, others put forth the idea that using adaptation is not always the 'right' way to do things, though the examples have been vague.

At least that's how I've understood this discussion.
Logged

MarkM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 428
    • Alaska Photographer Mark Meyer
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #461 on: January 07, 2011, 06:11:15 pm »

This entire argument boils down to adaptation.  If you use adaptation, the blue is within Pro Photo, and if you don’t then it isn’t (or if you simply mess it up because you don’t realize what you’re doing on the calculator.)

Yes, you are 100% correct. I could demonstrate that on Joofa's own graph, but it's pointless because he does not want to commit to the method he is using. If I took the time to make a graph demonstrating this, he would simply say it isn't correct without further explanation. In other words it's a waste of time.
Logged

joofa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 544
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #462 on: January 07, 2011, 06:12:56 pm »

Yay! We have a winner.

Again, not to put words in joofa's mouth, but I don't think he ever said, "I don't care about adaptation."  I think he was pointing out the case where you don't use it, as in his #1 of 4 cases.  Later, others put forth the idea that using adaptation is not always the 'right' way to do things, though the examples have been vague.

At least that's how I've understood this discussion.

TGray, you are a sane voice here. Please help me with others. BTW, I did note that tho_mas apparently found that when going from Prophoto RGB (D50)->Adobe RGB (D65), both abscol and relcol with adaption will be out of gamut. Right tho_mas? So apparently relcol is not always working.

Joofa
Logged
Joofa
http://www.djjoofa.com
Download Photoshop and After Effects plugins

joofa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 544
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #463 on: January 07, 2011, 06:15:07 pm »

Yes, you are 100% correct. I could demonstrate that on Joofa's own graph, but it's pointless because he does not want to commit to the method he is using. If I took the time to make a graph demonstrating this, he would simply say it isn't correct without further explanation. In other words it's a waste of time.

I don't know why you are after my methods. I repeat again, Iliah Borg, Peter (DPL), and JC1 have also independently confirmed what I said regarding case (1). If they can do it why can't you?

Joofa
Logged
Joofa
http://www.djjoofa.com
Download Photoshop and After Effects plugins

tho_mas

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1799
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #464 on: January 07, 2011, 06:29:32 pm »

BTW, I did note that tho_mas apparently found that when going from Prophoto RGB (D50)->Adobe RGB (D65), both abscol and relcol with adaption will be out of gamut. Right tho_mas? So apparently relcol is not always working.
what?
What I have shown to you is that ALL saturated blues of ProPhoto clip in AdobeRGB when converting either relcol or abscol. Which shows that AdobeRGB does NOT contain a single blue value that is outside of ProPhoto (otherwise the respective value would NOT show clipping).

"relcol is not always working" ... is a strange way to discribe this. In relcol colors of the source color space that are out of gamut of the target color space are clipped to the outer edges of the target gamut.
Now... convert ProPhoto RGB 0/0/255 relcol to AdobeRGB and plot that values in your strange software. You will find that it is exactly the highest saturated blue of AdobeRGB (D65!). How that when AdobeRGB contains higher saturated blues than ProPhoto (supposedly)? How can ProPhoto produce a blue that matches the highest saturated blue in AdobeRGB?

Logged

jeremypayne

  • Guest
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #465 on: January 07, 2011, 06:36:28 pm »

Gosh, all effort in vain. Conceptually, there is NO difference between Prophoto RGB (D50) and Prophoto RGB (D65), both can be conceived with the same exact thought!

Joofa

Is prophoto RGB (D50) contained within prophoto (D65)?

PS What is a color?
Logged

joofa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 544
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #466 on: January 07, 2011, 06:39:55 pm »

How that when AdobeRGB contains higher saturated blues than ProPhoto (supposedly)? How can ProPhoto produce a blue that matches the highest saturated blue in AdobeRGB?

tho_mas, I think I already gave you an answer a number of times. How hard it is to imagine that both Adobe RGB (D65) and Prophoto RGB (D50) contains colors that are outside each others gamuts. In fact, what you have found out is that going Prophoto RGB (D50)->Adobe RGB (D65) is even more messed up as it clips in both ways: abscol or relcol. So this is a stronger case than Adobe RGB (D65)->Prophoto RGB (D50).

If you ask me again why, then please read my recent messages to you again.

Guys, it is getting very repititious. If TGray can understand things perfectly, what is happening to you?

Sincerely,

Joofa
« Last Edit: January 07, 2011, 06:55:29 pm by joofa »
Logged
Joofa
http://www.djjoofa.com
Download Photoshop and After Effects plugins

jeremypayne

  • Guest
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #467 on: January 07, 2011, 06:43:30 pm »

tho_mas, I think I already gave you an answer a number of times. How hard it is to imagine that both Adobe RGB (D65) and Prophoto RGB (D50) contains colors that are outside each others gamuts. In fact, what you have found out is that going Prophoto RGB (D50)->Adobe RGB (D65) is even more messed up as it clips in both ways: abscol or relcol. So this is a stronger case than Adobe RGB (D65)->Prophoto RGB (D50).

If you ask me again why, then please read my recent messages to you again.

Guys, it is getting very repititious. If TGray can understand things perfectly, what is happening to you guys?

Sincerely,

Joofa


Numbers without meaning ... are ... numbers.

Can you define a color?  'cause if you can't, you have said nothing more than "2 is greater than 1".
Logged

Graystar

  • Guest
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #468 on: January 07, 2011, 06:47:39 pm »

I think he was pointing out the case where you don't use it, as in his #1 of 4 cases.

Right.  And what he's failing to realize is that those cases have no meaning whatsoever.

I already gave an analogy with temperature conversion.  There's 1.8 F to every 1 C.  So to convert C to F you multiply by 1.8.  But you also have to consider the freezing point of water.  So you have to add 32 to the result to get the actual F temperature that is physically the same as the C temperature.

In Joofa’s #1 and #4 cases, it’s like he’s forgetting about the 32, and then proclaiming that the two temperatures are the same.  That’s wrong.  The temperatures aren’t the same, and neither are the blues in his calculations.
Logged

tho_mas

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1799
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #469 on: January 07, 2011, 06:49:07 pm »

Guys, it is getting very repititious. If TGray can understand things perfectly, what is happening to you guys?
I have no trouble to understand that D50 is not D65.
ProPhoto's white is not contained in AdobeRGB's white and vice versa.
Likewise sRGB is also not fully contained in ProPhoto (have you plotted the 2 sRGB profiles I've posted above?)
A sheet of white paper looks different under tungsten and under daylight...
... unless your eyes adopt to the different lighting conditions.
After adaption to the different lighting conditions the white paper will look "the same".
« Last Edit: January 07, 2011, 06:52:06 pm by tho_mas »
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #470 on: January 07, 2011, 06:49:10 pm »

Yay! We have a winner.

Again, not to put words in joofa's mouth, but I don't think he ever said, "I don't care about adaptation."  I think he was pointing out the case where you don't use it, as in his #1 of 4 cases.  Later, others put forth the idea that using adaptation is not always the 'right' way to do things, though the examples have been vague.

At least that's how I've understood this discussion.

You can say that - or you can say that we have no RGB space currently in common use that covers the whole gamut of visual response and does not include imaginary colours. While we need something here - for those HDR displays that are coming.
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #471 on: January 07, 2011, 06:57:52 pm »

Is 2 really greater than 1?

Border guards are useful but need close attention when put into operations. Do not allow them to act on their own.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #472 on: January 07, 2011, 07:07:32 pm »

I think he was pointing out the case where you don't use it, as in his #1 of 4 cases.

So when using these ICC profiles in any current application, when and how (and why) would a conversion take place without adaptation?
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

MarkM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 428
    • Alaska Photographer Mark Meyer
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #473 on: January 07, 2011, 07:08:19 pm »

You can say that - or you can say that we have no RGB space currently in common use that covers the whole gamut of visual response and does not include imaginary colours.

And you never will. It is a fundamental limitation of trichromatic reproduction. You cannot match all visible colors with only three real primaries.
Logged

jeremypayne

  • Guest
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #474 on: January 07, 2011, 07:11:32 pm »

Border guards are useful but need close attention when put into operations. Do not allow them to act on their own.

You don't seem interested in actually contributing.  You seem to be intentionally vague and cryptic without offering clear and reasoned arguments.

How dissapointing ... I had thought you were more interested in teaching and spreading the good word.

Perhaps you've spent too much time arguing with the trolls at DPR ... Dunno.
Logged

tho_mas

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1799
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #475 on: January 07, 2011, 07:20:44 pm »

And you never will. It is a fundamental limitation of trichromatic reproduction. You cannot match all visible colors with only three real primaries.
this is only a fundemental limitation of matrix profiles
Logged

MarkM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 428
    • Alaska Photographer Mark Meyer
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #476 on: January 07, 2011, 07:22:50 pm »

this is only a fundemental limitation of matrix profiles

It's more fundamental than that. You may be able to make a profile that can do crazy things and specify off the wall coordinates in LUTs, but you won't be able to actually reproduce the colors with only three primaries.

Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #477 on: January 07, 2011, 07:23:28 pm »

You don't seem interested in actually contributing.  You seem to be intentionally vague and cryptic without offering clear and reasoned arguments.

How dissapointing ... I had thought you were more interested in teaching and spreading the good word.

Perhaps you've spent too much time arguing with the trolls at DPR ... Dunno.


My response was to Joofa.

I'm not interested in teaching at all and never was. What interests me is to help; mostly - to help people and ideas under attack from those who are only fit to play the leading role George Ruggle's piece.
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #478 on: January 07, 2011, 07:30:11 pm »

And you never will. It is a fundamental limitation of trichromatic reproduction. You cannot match all visible colors with only three real primaries.

Do you know why is it so?
Logged

MarkM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 428
    • Alaska Photographer Mark Meyer
Re: attention color whizes: non-typical sRGB/RGB/ProPhoto question
« Reply #479 on: January 07, 2011, 07:33:00 pm »

Do you know why is it so?

Yes. It's because the response curves of the cones overlap. You can't individually stimulate retinal cones separately. You always get unwanted stimulations which will lower the saturation of some colors you are trying to reproduce.

Hold on, let me find it…

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 35   Go Up