ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Profiles



On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 00:05:44 +0200  Alex Zabrovsky (alexz@zoran.co.il)
wrote:

> If I get your point correctly, you claim that monitors cannot display
> wider
> gamut then ordinary sRGB regardless of particular display qualities,

Correct

> which
> mean, there is no point to scan and save in Adobe 98 RGB which is wider
> and
> thus resulting in larger files.
> Am I wrong ?

There is a point, if you intend output to a wider-gamut device than a
screen at some time - for instance photo inkjets such as Epsons.

Using a wide gamut space can have disadvantages. Obviously you can't see on
screen the exact colour values of the image file because the monitor is
constrained to sRGB, and if you need at some point to output to CMYK, you
risk more colours being out of gamut. If CMYK is the eventual destination,
Colormatch RGB is a closer match.

> What about scanning for archive ?
Yup, a good choice and many people do. Ultimately what you do depends on
your intended use.


Regards

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info
& comparisons
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.