Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 27   Go Down

Author Topic: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic  (Read 124394 times)

supercurio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
  • Hi! New here
    • Google+
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #460 on: August 28, 2014, 02:48:50 am »

Who is going to get burned?  And more importantly, who is going to listen to your warnings?  Tony, are you mad because nobody knows who you are, or cares what you have to say, outside of this forum?  

It's like you write stuff like that just so people can find more reason to despite you.

"Look at me I'm famous, and hahaha I'm laughing at you because you're not."
Oh boy..
Logged

MarkM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 428
    • Alaska Photographer Mark Meyer
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #461 on: August 28, 2014, 03:04:33 am »

How does telling a photographer why their images all of a sudden look "dull" once they change that menu setting to AdobeRGB from sRGB do anything but benefit them- which was the point of this video?  
But you didn't tell them why. You made up a reason that has little if any basis in reality and when corrected turned to personal attacks. It's sad, Gary— a wasted opportunity to do something really useful for your audience.
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #462 on: August 28, 2014, 03:09:48 am »

Who is going to get burned?  And more importantly, who is going to listen to your warnings?  Tony, are you mad because nobody knows who you are, or cares what you have to say, outside of this forum? ...

...Do you even realize how petty and silly you all look?  And how do you not see that I am egging you on to make you post even more verbose things, to show what a self-important group of know-it-alls you try to be to each other?  
So then Gary you are officially declaring yourself a troll?
You are clearly stating that your purpose in joining this forum was nothing more than an attempt to provoke us is some way?
You clearly never had any other motive apart from the malicious?

Tony Jay
Logged

fdisilvestro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1852
    • Frank Disilvestro
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #463 on: August 28, 2014, 03:13:13 am »

Gary,

Have you considered a career in politics? You're ver good at it! The way you manipulate the messages, selectively edit the comments, keep calm while exasperating everybody else is impressive, you already had some here apologizing to you and in the meantime you have not retracted about any of the nonsense about color management.

Regards

Tibor O

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #464 on: August 28, 2014, 03:36:19 am »

Hmm... and of course that makes Adobe complete dolts in releasing Lightroom on us poor unsuspecting photographers where the only working colourspace available for our use is ProPhotoRGB. What knuckleheads they must be.

In Capture One Pro 7 the working colour space is defined by the camera's ICC Profile (defined in the Base characteristics tool). For Leaf this is Leaf ProPhoto RGB, for example (see attached picture).

So this, by Gary's standards, probably makes the guys at Phase One as totally insane :o

But, remember, Gary wants you to shoot JPEG and not RAW, but this is for another thread / discussion, one would say. ;)



Logged

garyfong

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #465 on: August 28, 2014, 03:46:11 am »

You will note in the description of the YouTube video, I said that probably the hottest debate in forums (outside of RAW vs JPG) is AdobeRGB and sRGB.  I'm here, yes, absolutely because I wanted to see how hot this topic would get.

I haven't seen an apology, but did I ask for one?  The YouTube video is staying up, is getting great feedback because it contains useful (not irrelevant) information that the typical photographer can put to good use.  How many times have I explained that the use of analogies like, "wide rainbows" or "muffin tops" were used to help people make a simple distinction about which to choose?  How many times have I explained that changing the monitor profile was an illustration to show what happens when wide gamut is expressed in narrow gamut equipment?  

Will Crockett has lectured nationwide, and is (alongside Eddie Tapp) the most recognized color expert among any of the top experts.  His video was fantastic.  He is an incredible teacher and extremely popular.  His (and my) type of instruction helps photographers move forward and appreciate photography.  All this group tries to do is intimidate people who are simply trying to take more pleasing photos.  I'm sorry you thought I was declaring myself famous and laughing at you.  I'm not.  I'm simply telling you that any individual in this group, or the group as a whole of its members, has absolutely no influence, anywhere.  So while you may claim to be out "saving the world from misinformation" you have two obstacles:  1) nobody knows or cares about you and 2) you don't have a unified cause anyway.  You all just argue with each other.

The typical photography enthusiast does not have a goal in life to wear a Coloritti blazer, or to purchase wide gamut monitors, or to make 3D animated diagrams of gamut balloons.  They just want to take photos they love.  Experts like you on the internet try so hard to top each other in minutiae so that I can't even get a clear cut picture of any consensus that you share.  I just see you all arguing with each other.  

I have businesses to run.  This is an important part of my business - illustrating the madness that ensues when a handful of color science experts (and not working photographers, as in the case of Andrew Rodney) get together in a forum and try to outwit each other.

Surely there have got to be simpler analogies than ebola and what happens in Sierra Leone.  You all are trying to impress each other with your deep, immense expertise of your mental horsepower, it takes someone like me to make you all mad at how I call it out on the open.

Surely you could say something like, "putting a ferrari engine in a SmartCar", or "swatting flies with a bazooka", but choosing words like "promulgating information" or "photographers generally in the formative stages of learning about photography in general" - but you choose these words and jargon to get attention.  To rise to the top of the class by sounding like you are so smart.

This is not what helps the industry.  Read my articles on PDN about my yearly state of the industry.  Intimidation of this kind discourages people from enjoying photography because you make them feel stupid, when they are not.  They may be beginners, but they are not an island of irrelevant gripers.  

I manage people in groups.  You folks are not a functioning group because of all of you out there, when I said I was going to do a visible test of two prints staying in their prospective workspaces from capture to output, while I asked many times, only one of you would go on the record and predict an AdobeRGB win.  So while you may be sure what is happening in Liberia, you sure weren't confident enough to say that your wider gamut would produce noticeably better results, with the exception of one person.  The rest of you called foul before I printed the test, yet your wider gamut print won!  That has got to sting!

Here's another thought for you.  You all know this group much better than I do.  Let me ask you a question.  Do you think Sony, or Lumix, or any company at all would hire this group to engineer the next innovation in color technology?  Or would they hire people who are not, as Will says, "falling in love with their workflow".

"You would rightly castigate me for not telling them the truth about how one really acquires Ebola." - you are SO smart for not talking normal. 
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 03:56:14 am by garyfong »
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #466 on: August 28, 2014, 03:53:03 am »

You will note in the description of the YouTube video, I said that probably the hottest debate in forums (outside of RAW vs JPG) is AdobeRGB and sRGB.  I'm here, yes, absolutely because I wanted to see how hot this topic would get.

I haven't seen an apology, but did I ask for one?  The YouTube video is staying up, is getting great feedback because it contains useful (not irrelevant) information that the typical photographer can put to good use.  How many times have I explained that the use of analogies like, "wide rainbows" or "muffin tops" were used to help people make a simple distinction about which to choose?  How many times have I explained that changing the monitor profile was an illustration to show what happens when wide gamut is expressed in narrow gamut equipment?  

Will Crockett has lectured nationwide, and is (alongside Eddie Tapp) the most recognized color expert among any of the top experts.  His video was fantastic.  He is an incredible teacher and extremely popular.  His (and my) type of instruction helps photographers move forward and appreciate photography.  All this group tries to do is intimidate people who are simply trying to take more pleasing photos.  I'm sorry you thought I was declaring myself famous and laughing at you.  I'm not.  I'm simply telling you that any individual in this group, or the group as a whole of its members, has absolutely no influence, anywhere.  So while you may claim to be out "saving the world from misinformation" you have two obstacles:  1) nobody knows or cares about you and 2) you don't have a unified cause anyway.  You all just argue with each other.

Their goals in life are not to wear a Coloritti blazer, or to purchase wide gamut monitors, or to make 3D diagrams of gamut balloons.  They just want to take photos they love.  Experts like you on the internet try so hard to top each other in minutiae that I can't even get a clear cut picture of any consensus that you share about the ideal workflow.  I just see you all arguing with each other.  

I have businesses to run.  This is an important part of my business - illustrating the madness that ensues when a handful of color science experts (and not working photographers, as in the case of Andrew Rodney) get together in a forum and try to outwit each other.

Surely there have got to be simpler analogies than ebola and what happens in Sierra Leone.  You all are trying to impress each other with your deep, immense expertise of your mental horsepower, it takes someone like me to make you all mad at how I call it out on the open.

Surely you could say something like, "putting a ferrari engine in a SmartCar", or "swatting flies with a bazooka", or words like "promulgating information" or photographers "generally in the formative stages of learning about photography in general" - but you choose these words and jargon to get attention.  To rise to the top of the class by sounding like you are so smart.

This is not what helps the industry.  Read my articles on PDN about my yearly state of the industry.  Intimidation of this kind discourages people from enjoying photography because you make them feel stupid, when they are not.  They may be beginners, but they are not an island of irrelevant gripers.  

I manage people in groups.  You folks are not a functioning group because of all of you out there, when I said I was going to do a visible test of two prints staying in their prospective workspaces from capture to output, while I asked many times, only one of you would go on the record and predict an AdobeRGB win.  So while you may be sure what is happening in Liberia, you sure weren't confident enough to say that your wider gamut would produce noticeably better results, with the exception of one person.  The rest of you called foul before I printed the test, yet your wider gamut print won!  That has got to sting!

Here's another thought for you.  You all know this group much better than I do.  Let me ask you a question.  Do you think Sony, or Lumix, or any company at all would hire this group to engineer the next innovation in color technology?  Or would they hire people who have answers without, as Will says, "falling in love with their workflow".


No comment, but suppressing a deep urge to laugh out loud.

Wait a minute...I smell goose cooking....

Tony Jay
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 04:08:57 am by Tony Jay »
Logged

Czornyj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1948
    • zarzadzaniebarwa.pl
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #467 on: August 28, 2014, 05:03:56 am »

Like many guys here I'm not a colour scientist like Graeme Gill or Andrew Rodney - I'm just a graphic designer, photographer and printer who learned colour management to avoid the waste of paper, and that's already far enough to realise you have virtually no idea of what you're talking about.

After a couple years of studies I had realised how difficult and complicated it is, and have a great respect for the people who are working in this challenging field.

The sad truth that an arrogant dabbler like you can't understand is that photography simply doesn't exist without colour science, and even an infinite number Crockett-like "colour experts" and "workflow lovers" wouldn't ever create even a simple camera (not to mention a printer).

You don't need to be a colour scientist to be a good photographer, but colour science can be useful if you want to achieve above average results - especially when making prints. Go read a book or two and maybe you'll finally get what's it all about.
 
You will note in the description of the YouTube video, I said that probably the hottest debate in forums (outside of RAW vs JPG) is AdobeRGB and sRGB.  I'm here, yes, absolutely because I wanted to see how hot this topic would get.

I haven't seen an apology, but did I ask for one?  The YouTube video is staying up, is getting great feedback because it contains useful (not irrelevant) information that the typical photographer can put to good use.  How many times have I explained that the use of analogies like, "wide rainbows" or "muffin tops" were used to help people make a simple distinction about which to choose?  How many times have I explained that changing the monitor profile was an illustration to show what happens when wide gamut is expressed in narrow gamut equipment?  

Will Crockett has lectured nationwide, and is (alongside Eddie Tapp) the most recognized color expert among any of the top experts.  His video was fantastic.  He is an incredible teacher and extremely popular.  His (and my) type of instruction helps photographers move forward and appreciate photography.  All this group tries to do is intimidate people who are simply trying to take more pleasing photos.  I'm sorry you thought I was declaring myself famous and laughing at you.  I'm not.  I'm simply telling you that any individual in this group, or the group as a whole of its members, has absolutely no influence, anywhere.  So while you may claim to be out "saving the world from misinformation" you have two obstacles:  1) nobody knows or cares about you and 2) you don't have a unified cause anyway.  You all just argue with each other.

The typical photography enthusiast does not have a goal in life to wear a Coloritti blazer, or to purchase wide gamut monitors, or to make 3D animated diagrams of gamut balloons.  They just want to take photos they love.  Experts like you on the internet try so hard to top each other in minutiae so that I can't even get a clear cut picture of any consensus that you share.  I just see you all arguing with each other.  

I have businesses to run.  This is an important part of my business - illustrating the madness that ensues when a handful of color science experts (and not working photographers, as in the case of Andrew Rodney) get together in a forum and try to outwit each other.

Surely there have got to be simpler analogies than ebola and what happens in Sierra Leone.  You all are trying to impress each other with your deep, immense expertise of your mental horsepower, it takes someone like me to make you all mad at how I call it out on the open.

Surely you could say something like, "putting a ferrari engine in a SmartCar", or "swatting flies with a bazooka", but choosing words like "promulgating information" or "photographers generally in the formative stages of learning about photography in general" - but you choose these words and jargon to get attention.  To rise to the top of the class by sounding like you are so smart.

This is not what helps the industry.  Read my articles on PDN about my yearly state of the industry.  Intimidation of this kind discourages people from enjoying photography because you make them feel stupid, when they are not.  They may be beginners, but they are not an island of irrelevant gripers.  

I manage people in groups.  You folks are not a functioning group because of all of you out there, when I said I was going to do a visible test of two prints staying in their prospective workspaces from capture to output, while I asked many times, only one of you would go on the record and predict an AdobeRGB win.  So while you may be sure what is happening in Liberia, you sure weren't confident enough to say that your wider gamut would produce noticeably better results, with the exception of one person.  The rest of you called foul before I printed the test, yet your wider gamut print won!  That has got to sting!

Here's another thought for you.  You all know this group much better than I do.  Let me ask you a question.  Do you think Sony, or Lumix, or any company at all would hire this group to engineer the next innovation in color technology?  Or would they hire people who are not, as Will says, "falling in love with their workflow".

"You would rightly castigate me for not telling them the truth about how one really acquires Ebola." - you are SO smart for not talking normal.  

« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 05:23:02 am by Czornyj »
Logged
Marcin Kałuża | [URL=http://zarzadzaniebarwa

supercurio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
  • Hi! New here
    • Google+
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #468 on: August 28, 2014, 05:26:01 am »

This guy is unbelievable.

Doesn't seem to be just a troll, he's genuinely delusional.
It's not funny anymore.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 05:44:00 am by supercurio »
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #469 on: August 28, 2014, 05:32:05 am »

Surely you could say something like, "putting a ferrari engine in a SmartCar", or "swatting flies with a bazooka", but choosing words like "promulgating information" or "photographers generally in the formative stages of learning about photography in general" - but you choose these words and jargon to get attention.  To rise to the top of the class by sounding like you are so smart.

 you are SO smart for not talking normal.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with Tony's use of language.

Your lack of precision in language is a corner stone of the problem here.
Logged

Tibor O

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #470 on: August 28, 2014, 06:01:28 am »

You will note in the description of the YouTube video, I said that probably the hottest debate in forums (outside of RAW vs JPG) is AdobeRGB and sRGB.  I'm here, yes, absolutely because I wanted to see how hot this topic would get.

So, should I shoot RAW or JPG? What's your opinion, Mr. Fong, on this topic?
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #471 on: August 28, 2014, 06:18:49 am »

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Tony's use of language.

Your lack of precision in language is a corner stone of the problem here.
Thanks for the support!

However, as far as Gary is concerned its pretty clear now we are completely wasting our time with him.
He has certainly slung some flaming arrows around today - some aimed specifically at me as you refer to, but he has very unwisely decided to tilt at the entire LuLa windmill.

I think it is entirely clear that he has no concept at all of who comprises the greater LuLa community and how many of them are not only industry pro's at the top of their game but also the very people that the industry turns to to develop new products whether it is camera equipment, software or other accessories. In other words exactly the kind of people he believes we are not and can't be.
It probably would not be an exaggeration to say that in toto almost no major company involved in digital photographic imaging and printing today does not lend an ear to at least one individual involved with LuLa.

As for me I probably don't have any street credibility as far as he is concerned but he has figured out that I am smart (about the only thing he appears to have got right in a while). As far as colour management goes I characterised myself as having a solid, and hopefully, still growing, grasp of colour management. Sadly, I think his attempts to belittle and dismiss me speak far more about him than about me.

As for the insults that he has thrown at the community as a whole belittling and dismissing everyone associating with LuLa - that may come back to bite him big time.

As for his credibility, apart from characterising himself with the best description of a troll that I have heard, he has also admitted that he has no grasp of colour management and cannot follow the point of our posts - apparently because we can't agree.
Strange, this thread has been almost unanimous in pointing out the flaws in his (non)understanding of colour management.

It is also very strange to be demanding apologies while shooting flaming arrows around as indiscriminately as he has done today.

I don't want to comment on his state of mind, someone has characterised him as delusional, although I could probably do a better job than almost anyone here at a lay diagnosis ( :D).
Rather, I think that what has transpired is sad, nothing to be glad about.
Nonetheless, one can only lead a horse to water...

Tony Jay
Logged

fdisilvestro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1852
    • Frank Disilvestro
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #472 on: August 28, 2014, 06:20:49 am »

So, should I shoot RAW or JPG? What's your opinion, Mr. Fong, on this topic?

JPG of course! I tried to look at a RAW file and the image looked dark and greenish, very ugly. The JPG instead was colorful and bright

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #473 on: August 28, 2014, 06:59:06 am »

Hi,

Well said...

The way I work is that I use ProPhoto RGB until conversion is needed. I do my own printing up to A2, anything larger goes to a pro lab in Sweden, called Crimson. The lab has a service called prefix, half a price and fast turnaround time, but you are responsible for colour management. Works perfectly for me.

Best regards
Erik

Like many guys here I'm not a colour scientist like Graeme Gill or Andrew Rodney - I'm just a graphic designer, photographer and printer who learned colour management to avoid the waste of paper, and that's already far enough to realise you have virtually no idea of what you're talking about.

After a couple years of studies I had realised how difficult and complicated it is, and have a great respect for the people who are working in this challenging field.

The sad truth that an arrogant dabbler like you can't understand is that photography simply doesn't exist without colour science, and even an infinite number Crockett-like "colour experts" and "workflow lovers" wouldn't ever create even a simple camera (not to mention a printer).

You don't need to be a colour scientist to be a good photographer, but colour science can be useful if you want to achieve above average results - especially when making prints. Go read a book or two and maybe you'll finally get what's it all about.
 
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

sandymc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 350
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #474 on: August 28, 2014, 07:02:21 am »

"Interesting" thread.

But 98% of the heat here is being generated because the question "sRGB vs Adobe RGB" doesn't have a real answer - it's the color management equivalent of the lawyer asking "Do you still beat your wife - answer yes or no". (Think about it).

The more useful question is a color managed vs. non-color managed environment.

If you have a properly color managed environment end-to-end, color space is largely irrelevant. Just pick a space that's got a wide enough gamut to encompass whatever you're dealing with, and forget about it. And e.g., ProPhoto is wide enough for pretty much anything practical. Yes, there are edge cases where you can screw up if you do something strange - ProPhoto JPEGs aren't a real good idea, etc, but largely color space won't matter.

As soon as you are out of a properly color managed environment, then Mr. Fong's message (if not explanation) is exactly correct - sticking with sRGB is your best bet of a reasonable result.

And btw, "properly color managed environment" has little or nothing to do with hardware.

Sandy
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 07:20:31 am by sandymc »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #475 on: August 28, 2014, 07:10:11 am »

Great posting, thanks!

BR Erik
"Interesting" thread.

But 98% of the heat here is being generated because the question "sRGB vs Adobe RGB" doesn't have a real answer - it's the color management equivalent of the lawyer asking "Do you still beat your wife - answer yes or no". (Think about it).

The more useful question is a color managed vs. non-color managed environment.

If you have a properly color managed environment end-to-end, color space is largely irrelevant. Just pick a space that's got a wide enough gamut to encompass whatever you're dealing with, and forget about it. And e.g., ProPhoto is wide enough for pretty much anything practical. Yes, there are edge cases where you can screw up if you do something strange - ProPhoto JPEGs aren't a real good idea, etc, but largely color space won't matter.

As soon as you are out a properly color managed environment, then Mr. Fong's message (if not explanation) is exactly correct - sticking with sRGB is your best bet of a reasonable result.

And btw, "properly color managed environment" has little or nothing to do with hardware.

Sandy
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #476 on: August 28, 2014, 07:19:52 am »

"Interesting" thread.

But 98% of the heat here is being generated because the question "sRGB vs Adobe RGB" doesn't have a real answer - it's the color management equivalent of the lawyer asking "Do you still beat your wife - answer yes or no". (Think about it).

The more useful question is a color managed vs. non-color managed environment.

Actually, Sandy the issue as far as nearly all here is concerned has NOTHING to do with sRGB vs AdobeRGB - the title of the thread notwithstanding.
As you suggest the real issue is really colour management.
And as you well know without colour management even the Gary Fong sRGB workflow approach will often only give mediocre results at best.
In fact one really needs to grasp a good deal about colour management to pull it off.

It is Gary Fong who believes that there is some controversy and debate in deciding which colourspace to use, not just as an output colourspace but a colourspace to use from capture to output.
Likewise he also believes, and made specific mention, of the fact that there is another big controversy in deciding whether to use JPEG or RAW.
Yet the place for each is very well known and understood and the debate and controversy exists only in his own head.

Tony Jay
Logged

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #477 on: August 28, 2014, 07:53:29 am »

You will note in the description of the YouTube video, I said that probably the hottest debate in forums (outside of RAW vs JPG) is AdobeRGB and sRGB.  I'm here, yes, absolutely because I wanted to see how hot this topic would get.

I haven't seen an apology, but did I ask for one?  The YouTube video is staying up, is getting great feedback because it contains useful (not irrelevant) information that the typical photographer can put to good use.  How many times have I explained that the use of analogies like, "wide rainbows" or "muffin tops" were used to help people make a simple distinction about which to choose?  How many times have I explained that changing the monitor profile was an illustration to show what happens when wide gamut is expressed in narrow gamut equipment?  

Will Crockett has lectured nationwide, and is (alongside Eddie Tapp) the most recognized color expert among any of the top experts.  His video was fantastic.  He is an incredible teacher and extremely popular.  His (and my) type of instruction helps photographers move forward and appreciate photography.  All this group tries to do is intimidate people who are simply trying to take more pleasing photos.  I'm sorry you thought I was declaring myself famous and laughing at you.  I'm not.  I'm simply telling you that any individual in this group, or the group as a whole of its members, has absolutely no influence, anywhere.  So while you may claim to be out "saving the world from misinformation" you have two obstacles:  1) nobody knows or cares about you and 2) you don't have a unified cause anyway.  You all just argue with each other.

The typical photography enthusiast does not have a goal in life to wear a Coloritti blazer, or to purchase wide gamut monitors, or to make 3D animated diagrams of gamut balloons.  They just want to take photos they love.  Experts like you on the internet try so hard to top each other in minutiae so that I can't even get a clear cut picture of any consensus that you share.  I just see you all arguing with each other.  

I have businesses to run.  This is an important part of my business - illustrating the madness that ensues when a handful of color science experts (and not working photographers, as in the case of Andrew Rodney) get together in a forum and try to outwit each other.

Surely there have got to be simpler analogies than ebola and what happens in Sierra Leone.  You all are trying to impress each other with your deep, immense expertise of your mental horsepower, it takes someone like me to make you all mad at how I call it out on the open.

Surely you could say something like, "putting a ferrari engine in a SmartCar", or "swatting flies with a bazooka", but choosing words like "promulgating information" or "photographers generally in the formative stages of learning about photography in general" - but you choose these words and jargon to get attention.  To rise to the top of the class by sounding like you are so smart.

This is not what helps the industry.  Read my articles on PDN about my yearly state of the industry.  Intimidation of this kind discourages people from enjoying photography because you make them feel stupid, when they are not.  They may be beginners, but they are not an island of irrelevant gripers.  

I manage people in groups.  You folks are not a functioning group because of all of you out there, when I said I was going to do a visible test of two prints staying in their prospective workspaces from capture to output, while I asked many times, only one of you would go on the record and predict an AdobeRGB win.  So while you may be sure what is happening in Liberia, you sure weren't confident enough to say that your wider gamut would produce noticeably better results, with the exception of one person.  The rest of you called foul before I printed the test, yet your wider gamut print won!  That has got to sting!

Here's another thought for you.  You all know this group much better than I do.  Let me ask you a question.  Do you think Sony, or Lumix, or any company at all would hire this group to engineer the next innovation in color technology?  Or would they hire people who are not, as Will says, "falling in love with their workflow".

"You would rightly castigate me for not telling them the truth about how one really acquires Ebola." - you are SO smart for not talking normal.  


Surely one of the longest posts I have ever seen on this forum with the least amount of content  :) ;)
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 08:01:26 am by Hans Kruse »
Logged

Tibor O

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #478 on: August 28, 2014, 08:16:57 am »

JPG of course! I tried to look at a RAW file and the image looked dark and greenish, very ugly. The JPG instead was colorful and bright

Well, thank you Mr. Disilvestro ;) It seems though that I am out of luck because I am using a Mamiya 645 AFD III with the old 22 mpx Leaf Aptus 22 digital back that produces gorgeous images in .MOS format but it seems I cannot set it to JPG. It seems I can only define the compression, but not also the format (JPG or TIFF or RAW) neither the colour space (sRGB, Adobe RG, ProPhoto). Please see attached pic of the digital back's menu for camera settings.

So, Mr. Fong, am I completely and utterly doomed? Do I need to sell my old MF equipment and buy a Sony A6000 to set it to sRGB and JPG to make good pictures?
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: New color management stand up comic
« Reply #479 on: August 28, 2014, 08:35:18 am »

Surely one of the longest posts I have ever seen on this forum with the least amount of content  :) ;)
Told you he was a very funny fellow.
He's PM me'd saying he's going to sue me. Hilarious. This is just getting funnier all the time.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 27   Go Up