4 ms·

In case anyone else was annoyed by the lack of technical details: Old (Rec. 709) colour space: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CIExy1931_Rec_709.svg https:/

In case anyone else was annoyed by the lack of technical details: Old (Rec. 709) colour space: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CIExy1931_Rec_709.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CIExy1931_Rec_709.svg New (Rec. 2020) colour space: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CIExy1931_Rec_2020.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CIExy1931_Rec_2020.svg Most of the "new colours" are greens and turquoises; reds can now be slightly brighter, but blue is almost unchanged.

jobigoud 10y ago
And violet is still entirely missing!
- jessaustin 10y ago
  You don't see it between red and blue, a little closer to blue?
  - sp332 10y ago
    You definitely can't "see" it on this chart, because your monitor doesn't display it. "The wavelength of the Rec. 2020 primary colors is 630 nm for the red primary color, 532 nm for the green primary color, and 467 nm for the blue primary color." Violet is a shorter wavelength, 380-420 nm or so.
  - jobigoud 10y ago
    That would be purple, I was referring to spectral violet, the color after blue and indigo when going down the spectrum.
jacobolus 10y ago
Gah. It’s been 40 years everyone. Let’s agree to stop using the CIE 1931 (x, y) chromaticity diagram, which is horribly misleading, in favor of the CIE 1976 UCS (u', v') chromaticity diagram. [I would replace all the diagrams on Wikipedia myself, but it would take several days of effort, and probably a few weeks’ slog of talk page arguments.] The difference between these two color spaces is much less extreme than the xy chart makes it look.
- cperciva 10y ago
  I don't know enough about colour perception to argue the merits of one diagram vs. another, but am I incorrect in my assessment of what colours are entering the gamut (lots of green, a bit of red, not much blue at all)?
  - jacobolus 10y ago
    Sort of. The green area is not nearly as dramatically different as the xy diagram makes it seem, while the red and blue areas will appear more different in the u'v' diagram. (Of course, chromaticity diagrams in general aren’t a perfect tool.) The “Gah” is directed at Wikipedia, not at you. You can see some u'v' diagrams alongside spectral power distribution charts of specific real-world displays in http://cias.rit.edu/media/uploads/faculty-f-projects/1304/documents/239/modeling-observer-metamerism.pdf http://cias.rit.edu/media/uploads/faculty-f-projects/1304/do...
- Niksko 10y ago
  What if we wrote a scraper and autoconverter? Is automated editing of Wikipedia prohibited?
  - x1798DE 10y ago
    I'm pretty sure most of Wikipedia editing is automated (by volume), see, e.g. ClueBot. That said, if you don't get consensus to make such bulk changes, it will probably not go over well.
tveita 10y ago
I look forward to one day seeing what these diagrams are actually supposed to look like... I kind of suspect that once you're used to the wider gamut, other screens will look washed out. Like how low-res CRT screens look awful and smudgy today, even though I used to be able to spend hours in front of one.

jobigoud 10y ago

And violet is still entirely missing!

jessaustin 10y ago
You don't see it between red and blue, a little closer to blue?
- sp332 10y ago
  You definitely can't "see" it on this chart, because your monitor doesn't display it. "The wavelength of the Rec. 2020 primary colors is 630 nm for the red primary color, 532 nm for the green primary color, and 467 nm for the blue primary color." Violet is a shorter wavelength, 380-420 nm or so.
- jobigoud 10y ago
  That would be purple, I was referring to spectral violet, the color after blue and indigo when going down the spectrum.

jacobolus 10y ago

Gah. It’s been 40 years everyone. Let’s agree to stop using the CIE 1931 (x, y) chromaticity diagram, which is horribly misleading, in favor of the CIE 1976 UCS (u', v') chromaticity diagram. [I would replace all the diagrams on Wikipedia myself, but it would take several days of effort, and probably a few weeks’ slog of talk page arguments.] The difference between these two color spaces is much less extreme than the xy chart makes it look.

cperciva 10y ago
I don't know enough about colour perception to argue the merits of one diagram vs. another, but am I incorrect in my assessment of what colours are entering the gamut (lots of green, a bit of red, not much blue at all)?
- jacobolus 10y ago
  Sort of. The green area is not nearly as dramatically different as the xy diagram makes it seem, while the red and blue areas will appear more different in the u'v' diagram. (Of course, chromaticity diagrams in general aren’t a perfect tool.) The “Gah” is directed at Wikipedia, not at you. You can see some u'v' diagrams alongside spectral power distribution charts of specific real-world displays in http://cias.rit.edu/media/uploads/faculty-f-projects/1304/documents/239/modeling-observer-metamerism.pdf http://cias.rit.edu/media/uploads/faculty-f-projects/1304/do...
Niksko 10y ago
What if we wrote a scraper and autoconverter? Is automated editing of Wikipedia prohibited?
- x1798DE 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure most of Wikipedia editing is automated (by volume), see, e.g. ClueBot. That said, if you don't get consensus to make such bulk changes, it will probably not go over well.

tveita 10y ago

I look forward to one day seeing what these diagrams are actually supposed to look like... I kind of suspect that once you're used to the wider gamut, other screens will look washed out. Like how low-res CRT screens look awful and smudgy today, even though I used to be able to spend hours in front of one.