[argyllcms] Re: Fw: Re: Correction for wide gamut screens and/or RGB-LED?

  • From: Roger Breton <graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 16:43:12 -0400

I remember discussing the quality of the 1931 Standard Observer with Mark
Fairchild, at the CIE Expert Symposium in Ottawa, a few years ago, and he
said to me "the Standard Observer works, on average". 

I wish I could better understand Deutch :(

Vielen danke für der link. I wrote the author about a possible French
version, even though I understand English ;-)

MfG / Roger

> -----Original Message-----
> From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-
> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Juergen Lilien
> Sent: 27 août 2010 22:51
> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Fw: Re: Correction for wide gamut screens and/or
> RGB-LED?
> 
> Roger Breton wrote:
> > I think the German Fogra document means "under imperfect adaptation".
> > Are they referring to the "imperfect adaptation of the obverver"? When
> > observing the display?
> 
> The translation of the headline is:
> "Why is there not always a perfect match between display measurements
> and visually perception?"
> One of the four reasons they discuss is "observer metamerism".
> They explain that the ?CIE 1931 2° standard observer", according to recent
> studies, is not describing the average of emmetropic (color-normal) human
> observers. There is a lot of fluctuation in the spectral sensitivity of
the retina
> between persons, so the derived standard observer curves are also
> fluctuating (Abb.3 shows 24 observer curves). This is the reason for
> "observer metamerism", which describes the problem that a human
> observer is able to perceive two colors as different even if the
colorimetric
> match is achieved.
> 
> I found one more interesting text on the subject:
> MODERN DISPLAYS: A CHALLENGE TO TRADITIONAL COLORIMETRY, AN
> OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE BEYOND THE STANDARD by Sarkar, Abhijit:
> 
> http://edstim.univ-nantes.fr/jdoc2010/USB-JDOC2010/sources/ARTS-
> Abhijit-SARKAR-Article.pdf
> (^copy in one line)
> 
> The concept for classifying color-normal observers in categories is
interesting.
> It would be great to have the option to select the individual best fitting
> observer in ArgyllCMS. But to do so you have to know your category, which
> requires the implementation of a test procedure.
> 
> But even in this text the 10° standard observer is mentioned as a
reasonably
> good match for the average observer.
> 
> In spotread it is possible to change the observer (option: -o observ) from
the
> default 1931_2 to 1964_10. There seems to be no option in dispcal to
change
> the observer, so does it also default to 1931_2?
> Is it possible to implement the option to change the observer in dispcal
> (minor problem: "-o" is already used)?
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-
> >> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Juergen Lilien
> Ups, "bounce"? Is there something wrong with my posts?
> 
> Regards, Juergen




Other related posts: