At 12:22 PM 4/28/2006, ScottGee1 wrote:
>Then all we'll need are printers, paper and ink that can do justice to the
>gamut.
>
>Though I read that the new high-end Epsons are moving in that direction.
There are other reasons to work in a high gamut color space. The
assumption that because we can't print it, is not the reason for avoiding the
higher gamut space. Check out Dan Margulis's book "Photoshop LAB
Color" for some technical explanations. It has to do with what the extended
space allows for when doing adjustments and the way those adjustment
calculations are performed, not the fact there are useless out of gamut
colors in that space.
I read that adobe camera raw works in a gamma of 1.0 because the
calculations behave differently. But it is nearly impossible to visually
understand gamma 1.0. Even in sRGB there are a lot of colors, maybe 90%
that will never see the printed page. And I've wondered whether the
claims working on a Mac is better, because the default gamma is
1.8 versus 2.2. Certain image adjustments and calculations behave
different with different gamma's.
WayneS
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|