If you're serious on this (I assume you are), then I must start
thinking this whole thing over.
I'm not suggesting it's a bad thing, I'm stating it's horrid.
If I buy a pair of loudspeakers, I choose one which would represent
input as accurately as where the musicians played.
I avoid 'colored' or 'voiced' loudspeakers. I avoid 'laid back' or
'forward sounding' loudspeakers. Wide dispersion high-frequencies v.
narrowly focused.
Hope this comparison can be understood.
sRGB ... nah!.
Fortunately, I will never see the difference, as my monitor isn't up
to show it to me.
After I edit anything in aRGB, and then convert to sRGB, PS doesn't
show differences to my eyes, no matter how many carrots I had eat
during the former week. But the histogram may show some differences.
Fernando.
--- still learning.
2009/12/10 Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> Does it imply that we are _always_ dealing with a finite number of bits?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
> But I'm not suggesting that it's a bad thing. Each colorspace has distinct
> advantages over another. One colorspace will represent the middle-tones with
> more bits at the expense of the high/low tones.
>
> _____ Schnozz
> --
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|