Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: I need a better monitor  (Read 4810 times)
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« on: April 29, 2013, 09:47:22 PM »
ReplyReply

The dirty little secret of soft proofing is that monitors have limitations, yet we like to think they don't.

Here are some slapdash iccview.de graphs.

The wireframe is my 2690WUXi monitor profile.

The colored hull is a moderately high gamut glossy canvas, which is in the same ballpark as most barytas .

Look at all the important colors that my poor monitor can't adequately represent!  And I have seen the results of this effect with my own eyes.

In soft proofing, even a pretty good monitor can't go a few places where the media itself can!  Explains a lot of things I've been noticing recently, such as how low gamut matte media soft proofs more accurately than high gamut glossy media.  You can make your own conclusions, but this is definitely food for thought.  Maybe my theory is wrong, but it seems supported by my empirical observations.

All I'm asking here is a monitor that can cover 100% ProPhotoRGB, what's the holdup?  Or at least represent every color the human eye can see. Andrew knows the name of that concept, which I can't remember.
Logged
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 722


« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2013, 10:06:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The problem is less it being possible....it is how much it would cost.   Grin
Logged

John
Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2013, 10:10:02 PM »
ReplyReply

All I'm asking here is a monitor that can cover 100% ProPhotoRGB, what's the holdup? 

ProPhoto RGB has two primaries that are not physically realizable. The green one is only a little way outside the xy or uv horseshoe, but the blue one is wildly outside. So, as long as monitors have three primaries, and light mixes additively, we'll never see a monitor that can cover the whole Pro Photo RGB gamut, or even that part of it that's visible to humans.

Sad, huh?

Jim
Logged

Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2013, 10:16:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Last year, I looked at what you could do to build a really wide-gamut monitor with three primaries; the challenges are daunting, even with spectral primaries.

Adding a fourth primary helps.

Jim

Logged

Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2013, 10:46:01 PM »
ReplyReply

In soft proofing, even a pretty good monitor can't go a few places where the media itself can!  Explains a lot of things I've been noticing recently, such as how low gamut matte media soft proofs more accurately than high gamut glossy media.  You can make your own conclusions, but this is definitely food for thought.  Maybe my theory is wrong, but it seems supported by my empirical observations.

Your theory is bang-on. Take a look here for similar conclusions.

Jim
Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5415


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2013, 11:49:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Andrew knows the name of that concept, which I can't remember.

Not sure what Andrew calls it, but I call it "unobtainiaum"  which is anything that is, well unattainable...

"In engineering, fiction, and thought experiments, unobtainium is any fictional, extremely rare, costly, or impossible material, or (less commonly) device needed to fulfill a given design for a given application."

Will displays get better? Yes...however, unfortunately, computer display technology is actually driven by consumer TV technology, so we are at the whim of a different, related but not directly connected tech.

The trick is to learn how to adapt and adopt what we have now, to do what we want to do now and learn how to deal with it's limitations...
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5415


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2013, 11:53:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Jim, I like your enthusiasm...now, we just need to connect you to some of the guys who move the display tech forward like Karl Lang and Will Hollingsworth. Karl designed the original Colormatch display system for radius and Will works for NEC Displays. Both are LuLa members (although they don't post a lot).
Logged
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2013, 12:02:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Hey, but wasn't my old LaCie Electron Blue better in this regard?  Until if faded to under 80 cdm2's?

A couple years ago there were LCD TV's down at BestBuy with a yellow patch in their RGBY matrix.  Sure had bright yellows and greens.  Doesn't seem to have driven much into our little world, however.

OK, I'll shut up and adapt.  But I've lost all respect for this monitor.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5415


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2013, 01:51:07 AM »
ReplyReply

But I've lost all respect for this monitor.

Well, that's one way of dealing with disappointment, the other is to learn how to use what you have to the best of your ability!
Logged
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2013, 02:04:04 AM »
ReplyReply

OK, will try not try to wallow in a lifetime of Gamut Regret.

PS needs one of those LR style monitor gamut buttons.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5415


WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2013, 03:19:33 AM »
ReplyReply

PS needs one of those LR style monitor gamut buttons.

Naw, it'll only be yet another fixation that will distract photographers. Just shoot raw, use Pro Photo RGB, soft proof with good prifiles in LR/PS and make great prints...pretty easy, actually.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8582



WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2013, 09:01:39 AM »
ReplyReply

The problem is less it being possible....it is how much it would cost.   Grin

Doesn't matter! ProPhoto is a theoretically constructed color space (like all the RGB working spaces). All you need are some chromaticity values to plot a gamut and even if one or two don't fall within human vision, no problem. Well it's a problem if you want to design a real world device to produce something we can't see (this ProPhoto display). IOW, ProPhoto defines "colors" we can't see (so I'd submit, they are not colors).

You'll never see a ProPhoto RGB display unless the time comes those super fetus aliens from 2001 a space odyssey up our evolutionary powers such we can see outside the current limit of our visual systems.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8582



WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2013, 09:06:29 AM »
ReplyReply

The dirty little secret of soft proofing is that monitors have limitations, yet we like to think they don't.

Only those who are trying to sell something, or don't fully understand the differences in gamuts in devices and their inherent limitations.

You know, there are colors we can see a digital camera can't capture while there are 'colors' it can capture we can't see (although much is done to reduce these). There are colors in working space we can't print or display, there are colors we can display we can't print. No dirty little secret, but often a revelation for those starting to understand the limits of digital color imaging!

Breaking news: We don't live in a prefect world.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2013, 09:58:34 AM »
ReplyReply

ProPhoto is a theoretically constructed color space (like all the RGB working spaces). All you need are some chromaticity values to plot a gamut and even if one or two don't fall within human vision, no problem. Well it's a problem if you want to design a real world device to produce something we can't see (this ProPhoto display). IOW, ProPhoto defines "colors" we can't see (so I'd submit, they are not colors).

Ahh, those fun-loving guys at Kodak. They're the same people that brought us PhotoYcc, which was based on an RGB color space with physically-realizable primaries, but allowed negative amounts of them. Try that on your display!

Jim
Logged

afx
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2013, 10:46:42 AM »
ReplyReply

And a more current monitor will not help either....
(NEC PA301w vs Canson Baryta)

cheers
afx

Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8582



WWW
« Reply #15 on: April 30, 2013, 11:04:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Ahh, those fun-loving guys at Kodak. They're the same people that brought us PhotoYcc, which was based on an RGB color space with physically-realizable primaries, but allowed negative amounts of them. Try that on your display!

Couple points. First, last time I looked, Lab which has a strange following also had negative numbers.

Have you ever seen what PhotoYCC in say Photoshop looks like (without the proper transforms)? Acid trip.

PhotoYCC was in a large way, the predecessor of the raw data so many of us today cherish. It was way ahead of it's time.

I'll let other's argue if "PhotoYcc, which was based on an RGB color space" is valid.

We're talking numbers here which have no useful definition without a scale. That scale tells us the gamut among other things. The numbers can be CMYK, Lab or RGB and all could be out of display gamut. Life's a bitch. If your only interest is the output to a display, that's the only gamut you need to be concerned with. I'd shutter to think that in 10 years, the gamut of output devices the masses are using isn't wider than today. This is a moving target. We've seen this in relatively few years with both inkjet and traditional 4 color CMYK output.

WYS isn't always WYG but we strive to get as close as we can with the limitations of technology and a CMS and it's somewhat archaic basis and architecture.

If you want to dumb down the gamut of your output to match your display, that's pretty darn easy to do.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 744


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 30, 2013, 11:25:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I'll let other's argue if "PhotoYcc, which was based on an RGB color space" is valid.

A few quotes from this Kodak white paper:

"Note that the RGB values delivered by the reference image capturing device are not constrained to positive values. This allows the PhotoYCC scheme to include colors outside the CCIR 709 display primary gamut. Furthermore, the reference image capture device values may exceed the values for a 100% white in order to preserve important specular highlight information."

"If you are familiar with video broadcasting standards, you may recognize that for positive values of R, G, and B, the nonlinear transformation corresponds to the optoelectronic transfer characteristic defined in CCIR 709. As a result, colors that are outside of the gamut defined by the CCIR 809 [sic] primaries are encoded by the negative values."

Jim
Logged

WayneLarmon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


« Reply #17 on: May 01, 2013, 03:08:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'd shutter to think that in 10 years, the gamut of output devices the masses are using isn't wider than today.

4K HDTV coming pretty fast.   4K will use the Rec. 2020 spec, which has a wider gamut than anything currently on the market.


Wikipedia article on Rec. 2020

From the Wikipedia article: "In coverage of the CIE 1931 color space the Rec. 2020 color space covers 75.8%, digital cinema covers 53.6%, the Adobe RGB color space covers 52.1%, and Rec. 709 covers 35.9%." Which smokes my NEC PA241W.

There are 4K TVs on the market right now. (but I don't know if this one is actually Rec. 2020.)

I extracted most of the above info from a recent thread on Slashdot:

High End Graphics Cards Tested At 4K Resolutions

Logged
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 01, 2013, 03:50:48 PM »
ReplyReply

^ That particular one is not quite ready for prime time, according to a PCMag revue.  Looks like that Mt. Everest-like, Rec. 2020 green peak and vision-spanning blue to red base is gonna have to wait for better technology.

Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2519


« Reply #19 on: May 02, 2013, 03:24:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Even if you get a " sooper dooper " monitor then you have to get  " sooper dooper " profiles and a " sooper dooper " bang up to date printer. if you are outputting for the web then viewers won't have a " sooper dooper " monitor as good as yours. It is all problematic and to say the least expensive. Smiley
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad