Slobodan, if you go back to Gary Fong's video and watch the whole thing he undeniably exhorts people to use sRGB from capture onwards.
The fact that he has subsequently, under a lot of pressure, grudgingly admitted that AdobeRGB might be OK IF one has the hardware to handle it is also a gross distortion of any of the known facts of colour management.
Again, I stress that Gary is not talking about output colourspace assignment but using the same colourspace throughout one's workflow.
We all know, I hope, that an enormous amount of information is lost between the scene when shot and whatever output mode one chooses. Colour management is a key part, but not the whole story, of making sure that the output (whether it be a small 8-bit JPEG sitting on a webpage somewhere or a room-size print) can acceptably portray what was shot.
The details may differ depending on whether one is doing product photography versus a fine-art capture of a beautiful sunset but the principles never do.
So, unlike Gary's silly demonstration of changing his monitor's colourspace on the fly to "prove" that AdobeRGB cannot represent colours accurately, it is, in fact still possible to very adequately edit and softproof an image in Lightroom using ProPhotoRGB as the working colourspace using a monitor whose gamut is similar to sRGB where the output gamut is determined by some printer/paper ICC profile.
Does a larger gamut monitor help?
Yes, it does but the bottom line is that the gamut of my printer exceeds even what my wide-gamut monitor can display (something approaching the gamut of AdobeRGB).
Yet I get excellent results.
However the logical conclusion, that is if you believe Gary Fong, is that what I do is complete bullshyte (apologies to Schewe).
Nonetheless, the reason that I get good results has absolutely nothing at all to do with the apparent ability of any bits of the hardware in that process from input to output to "handle" any particular colourspace, but rather everything to do with the rational application of colour management principles.
Is information lost along the way - You betcha! Plenty!
Colour management, however, allows me to make rational decisions every step of the way that allow a very close (obviously never identical) representation of what the camera was pointed at in the first place.
There is nothing new in what I have written - probably a large majority of people on this forum, particularly if they do their own printing, will recognise the outline there as very familiar.
Can a case be made for using sRGB from capture to output?
Absolutely.
Press photographers (are there any left these days?) will shoot JPEG's with sRGB tagged in-camera because they need their images posted on the news organisations website about five minutes after capture.
Does this make sense?
Definitely!
However, the reasons for doing this have absolutely nothing to do with the silly explanations of Gary Fong.
Also, as an aside, the suggestion has been made that it is OK for Gary Fong to promulgate his silly hypotheses because on some level he may have a point that a lot of people just want the simplest way to do something.
I want to take issue with that because no-one who is not interested in, or completely ignorant of, colour management will ever view that video clip because they will simply not look for it.
You just don't know what you don't know... (again, apologies to Schewe)
Instead those people are seeking that information specifically to get clarification on how to organise their workflow.
It is very easy, using sound colour management principles, to explain a rational workflow where one does use sRGB from capture to output. However it would be completely remiss not to mention the many and varied limitations of such an approach and also not to proffer other alternatives, explaining their various pro's and con's in turn.
I say again: Knowledge is power!
What Gary Fong has offered is not knowledge but complete FUD (again, apologies to Schewe!).
Tony Jay