I have tried again but now the results seems in order, maybe the first time I made an error somewhere.
BTW it arise a question comparing the monitor and prophoto gamut: it overcomes the 100%, is it normal? (see attachment)
Thank you Marco
Il giorno 22/ago/2011, alle ore 23:45, Gerhard Fuernkranz ha scritto:
Am 21.08.2011 22:18, schrieb Marco Noldin:
Thank you for the answer. What I don't understand
is the results whit absolute intent: why the intersect in sRGB
is bigger than Adobe RGB?
> using the -i option with viewgam seems that sRGB can
> encode more colors than Adobe RGB (68% vs 62%).
Can you post the command lines and outputs of iccgamut and
viewgam?
Do you interpret the numbers correctly?
Example:
$ viewgam -i sRGB.gam printer.gam out.wrl
Intersecting volume = 512354.4 cubic units
'sRGB.gam' volume = 833600.9 cubic units, intersect = 61.46%
'printer.gam' volume = 552445.5 cubic units, intersect =
92.74%
$ viewgam -i AdobeRGB1998.gam printer.gam out.wrl
Intersecting volume = 552205.4 cubic units
'AdobeRGB1998.gam' volume = 1209985.9 cubic units, intersect =
45.64%
'printer.gam' volume = 552445.5 cubic units, intersect =
99.96%
This means that
- the printer can reproduce 61.46% of the sRGB gamut
- the printer can reproduce 45.64% of the Adobe RGB gamut
- sRGB can reproduce 92.74% of the printer's gamut
- Adobe RGB can reproduce 99.96% of the printer's gamut
Regards,
Gerhard
|