[argyllcms] Re: How can I tell if I'm using my profile? (and other questions)
- From: Adrian Mariano <adrian@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:02:50 -0400
Florian Höch wrote:
If it is foreseeable that most if not all images you view are
actually sRGB (and we assume that sRGB images indeed should be
viewed with a sRGB gamma, and not just encoded with it but viewed on
say a gamma 2.x monitor), then I agree it is surely a good idea to
use that as tone curve when calibrating.
Here you seem to be raising the point that I was really asking about,
which is: how should sRGB tagged images be viewed. The images from
my camera, which I presume are sRGB tagged, looked a bit washed out
when I viewed them with a sRGB calibration as compared to the
gamma=2.4 calibration.
This is because the image viewing app did not do a proper
colormanagement, so the different gammas were not accounted for.
Well, the point here was to assess the affect of viewing the images with
different gammas, so I wanted to see a change. (That's one reason I was
using an app I was pretty sure didn't do color management.) But if we
think that the gamma=2.4 looks better and the images are all tagged as
sRGB then under color management we'll get the inferior result.
But if sRGB images are supposed to be viewed on a gamma=2.4 display
and I have color management then won't I be in trouble? The color
management would correct for the gamma and give me the sRGB result.
Just for the sake of completeness: Regardless of what gamma you end up
calibrating your monitor to, and assumed that sRGB images should be
viewed with a gamma of (say) 2.4 instead of with sRGB curve, then in a
colormanaged workflow you'd actually have to discard the embedded sRGB
profile from the image, and embed a profile with the same primaries
but a gamma of 2.4 (I hope this is not too confusing, I myself start
to get a bit dizzy at the moment ;))
Ok. This all makes sense. (I didn't get confused yet.)
So the final question is: should sRGB images be viewed with a gamma of
2.4 as is suggested by this quote from the dispcal manual:
"Note that many color spaces are encoded with, and labeled as having a
gamma of approximately 2.2 (ie. sRGB, REC 709, SMPTE 240M), but are
actually intended to be displayed on a display with a typical CRT gamma
of 2.4. This is because this 2.2 gamma is a source gamma encoding in
bright viewing conditions such as a television studio, while typical
display viewing conditions are quite dark by comparison, and a contrast
expansion of (approx.) gamma 1.1 is desirable to make the images look as
intended."
Is sRGB material (e.g. photos my digital camera took, which I assume are
sRGB) actually "intended" to be displayed with a gamma of 2.4?
Other related posts:
