Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware
From: Stephen H. Westin (westin*nospam_at_graphics.cornell.edu)
Date: 09/29/04
- Next message: usenet_at_imagenoir.com: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- Previous message: usenet_at_imagenoir.com: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- In reply to: Rick: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- Next in thread: Phil Green: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 28 Sep 2004 22:42:29 -0400
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> writes:
> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message news:DOh6d.11857$JM5.6885@news.cpqcorp.net...
> >
> > "Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> > news:2rrn0cF1dcknkU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > We've been through this, Stephen, where you pull out your
> > > highly misleading "research paper" and make highly misleading
> > > claims based on misleading information.
> > >
> > > The bottom line? Virtually no professional graphic shops use
> > > LCDs. Why? Because any serious attempt at color correcting
> > > on con/prosumer LCDs is an exercise in futility. End of story.
> >
> > Well, YOU made the claim that a given CRT monitor
> > "outgamuts" an LCD. Stephen quite rightly asked you to
> > justify that claim by describing the gamut of the monitor in
> > question in quantitative terms. I'd also like to see that, and
> > am willing to bet that you can't provide numbers that support
> > that specific claim. Whether or not "any serious attempt at
> > color correcting... is an exercise in futility" is not relevant to
> > the claims you've made. (In other words, you may be right
> > in that broad statement, at least for most current monitors,
> > but not for the reasons you stated.)
> >
> > So let's see your numbers. End of story.
>
> This debate is recurring. The last one was not long ago. The
> numbers in Stephen's reference have been discussed over and
> over, with the same conclusion every time. The reference's
> numbers show (correctly) that CRTs have orders of magnitude
> more dynamic range, especially for near blacks, then it proceeds
> to claim that this isn't an advantage, because of "typical office
> lighting conditions" -- which is completely irrelevant to the issue.
>
> Those who claim LCDs have anywhere near the same gamut as
> a decent CRT are generally the same people who've never even
> heard of a light hood. I invite you to look up these previous
> threads in Google's Usenet archive, e.g. http://tinyurl.com/623mb
>
> Rick
>
>
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> writes:
> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message news:DOh6d.11857$JM5.6885@news.cpqcorp.net...
> >
> > "Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> > news:2rrn0cF1dcknkU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > We've been through this, Stephen, where you pull out your
> > > highly misleading "research paper" and make highly misleading
> > > claims based on misleading information.
> > >
> > > The bottom line? Virtually no professional graphic shops use
> > > LCDs. Why? Because any serious attempt at color correcting
> > > on con/prosumer LCDs is an exercise in futility. End of story.
> >
> > Well, YOU made the claim that a given CRT monitor
> > "outgamuts" an LCD. Stephen quite rightly asked you to
> > justify that claim by describing the gamut of the monitor in
> > question in quantitative terms. I'd also like to see that, and
> > am willing to bet that you can't provide numbers that support
> > that specific claim. Whether or not "any serious attempt at
> > color correcting... is an exercise in futility" is not relevant to
> > the claims you've made. (In other words, you may be right
> > in that broad statement, at least for most current monitors,
> > but not for the reasons you stated.)
> >
> > So let's see your numbers. End of story.
>
> This debate is recurring. The last one was not long ago. The
> numbers in Stephen's reference have been discussed over and
> over, with the same conclusion every time. The reference's
> numbers show (correctly) that CRTs have orders of magnitude
> more dynamic range, especially for near blacks,
First, a CRT with a totally black screen will be much darker than
an LCD with the same image. Unfortunately, that gets a lot brighter
if you actually display anything useful on the screens. Orders of
magnitude brighter, so that the dynamic range of a CRT with reasonable
image content isn't dramatically better than that of an LCD. As I recall,
the figure was around 4000:1 range for black screen vs. white screen,
but only about 350:1 when the majority of the screen is displaying
middle gray.
Second, "dynamic range" is the ratio between white and black, so
I don't know what "more dynamic range, especially for near blacks"
can possibly mean.
> then it proceeds
> to claim that this isn't an advantage, because of "typical office
> lighting conditions" -- which is completely irrelevant to the issue.
Because, of course, you only use your CRT in a photographic darkroom..
> Those who claim LCDs have anywhere near the same gamut as
> a decent CRT are generally the same people who've
.. actually measured them.
> never even
> heard of a light hood.
Oh do please explain how the color gamut of a display is
strongly affected by stray light.
As Bob pointed out, you may not understand what the term "display
gamut" means. It primarily refers to the chromaticities produced; as
Bob also pointed out, there doesn't seem to be an advantage of CRT's
over the best LCD's these days.
> I invite you to look up these previous
> threads in Google's Usenet archive, e.g. http://tinyurl.com/623mb
Hmm. You might actually want to read them yourself.
I recall my reference to the Munsell Color Science Lab at RIT and your
vehement misinterpretation as meaning the Munsell Labs subsidiary of
GretagMacbeth. I remember my quotes from their director, and your
references to "most professionals", whoever they may be, and "almost
everyone who has tried it". I recall posting links to various
measurements, and in fact measuring my own CRT, and your never
responding once with any sort of quantitative assessment.
As far as I can tell, you don't know much about color science, don't
know the meaning of the terms you throw around, and would rather
follow "conventional wisdom" than actually find out the truth of the
matter.
-- -Stephen H. Westin Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.
- Next message: usenet_at_imagenoir.com: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- Previous message: usenet_at_imagenoir.com: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- In reply to: Rick: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- Next in thread: Phil Green: "Re: 30-bit Color on 24-bit Hardware"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
