Yes, monitors are perfectly capable of producing colors contained in
Adobe RGB... provided they cost more than about $6,000. See fact #3 in
this link: <http://www.shootsmarter.com/monitorcentral.html>
Chuck Norcutt
Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I admit I have trouble understanding some of it, but I don't think
> what you said about the monitor being an sRGB device is accurate.
> Even in your article reference at Cambridge he says,
>
> "All of these extra colors in Adobe RGB 1998 are great to have for
> viewing on a computer monitor, but can we actually reproduce them in
> a print? It would be a shame to edit using these extra colors, only
> to later retract their intensity due to printer limitations."
>
> So it sounds as if a monitor is perfectly capable of reproducing
> Adobe RGB 1998.
>
>
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2006, at 2:38 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>
>>A religious argument mostly. If you send to commercial labs for
>>prints
>>then use sRGB. If you don't they'll convert it anyhow. If you
>>print at
>>home and have a really first class ink jet printer with, say, 8 ink
>>colors it might be able to show some of the additional color from
>>Adobe
>>RGB over sRGB. However, you won't likely be able to see it on your
>>monitor which is an sRGB device. Confused? Here's a reasonable
>>treatise on the subject.
>><http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|