14 ms·

Wide Color Photos Are Coming to Android

92 points by el_duderino 7y ago

Tarragon 7y ago
I'm amused that chrome on Win10 does not pass their simple red logo test.
- curiousgal 7y ago
  Chrome vs Firefox on the Pixel 2 https://i.imgur.com/kwirB6C.png https://i.imgur.com/kwirB6C.png
  - sp332 7y ago
    Firefox on a Galaxy S8 works. I wonder what the difference could be between two browsers on the same phone?
    - wmf 7y ago
      That's what the article is about: Apps need to use Android APIs correctly to display color accurately.
      - rplst8 7y ago
        So Google Chrome running on Google Android doesn't use the correct Android APIs but Firefox does? Why is Chrome "the standard" again?
        Semaphor 7y ago
        > Why is Chrome "the standard" again? It has no adblocker.
        wccrawford 7y ago
        I just set the Chrome flag to force the display profile and was able to see the image on my Pixel 3a. The default profile will not show it. So Chrome is using the APIs, but actually using that profile is still behind a feature flag, it seems. Edit: I just tried it in Firefox and the log is much clearer. This makes me think that Firefox is doing something to change the image before displaying it, which is why it "works" there. On Chrome, the image was incredibly faint.
  - zawerf 7y ago
    I am confused about why I can see this screenshot since I am not on a wide gamut monitor. Is firefox doing a weird conversion or the screenshotting tool? My (probably flawed) understanding was that wide colors means there's more than 8 bits. So stuff that would be say rgb(254.5, 0, 0) would now be distinguishable from rgb(255, 0, 0)? If you screenshotted it back to 8 bit you would just lose the extra bits and I expected to still see a red square? Or is that not how it works?
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - TwoBit 7y ago
      Yes flawed. If you have a bitmap that's using a wide color space (e. g. P3/OLED) and it has a green (0,1,0) pixel then that's referring to a color than an LCD display cannot possibly show. 0,1,0 on an LCD is a less saturated green. The OS changes color values to try to make things look as much as expected as possible, and that results in color clipping. A screenshot saves images as sRGB and so no remapping is done upon display.
- LeoPanthera 7y ago
  You must have a wide-color-gamut compatible monitor in order for the test to even be possible. Most laptops and desktops do not. Safari on my iPhone X passes.
  - foolrush 7y ago
    And have properly set up colour management working, which on Windows is close to zero percent probability. This also ignores the shortcuts that Chrome and other browsers have taken on their road to colour management.
    - beering 7y ago
      > And have properly set up colour management working, which on Windows is close to zero percent probability. Maybe surprising to some, but Windows actually supports HDR10 (which includes "wide-gamut" color) better than other OSes. You can, for example, play HDR10 video games with a connected HDR-capable monitor. It might be thanks to MS's Xbox platform.
- Jonnax 7y ago
  Do you have a HDR display? Have you enabled Wide Colour Gamut?
- mey 7y ago
  A lot of variables involved. For me Win 10 17134, with an NVidia GTX 960, over displayport to Dell U2417H, I can see the two colors in Chrome and Firefox. I can't see the color difference in Microsoft Edge. The ICC Profile for the monitor was automatically loaded by Windows. Everything is 32 bit. I think the ICC profile is the only reason I can see it and it isn't a very strong difference on my monitor. Edit: When I say 32bit, I mean 8 bit per RGB channel/24 bit "True Color"
hayksaakian 7y ago
They say that an S10 should see it but my S10 with up to date Google Chrome doesn't show the android logo in the red image. Funny enough I can see it just fine on my Macbook Pro running the latest Firefox stable.
- guelo 7y ago
  On my S10+ it works on Firefox but not Chrome or Samsung's browser.
- marzell 7y ago
  I'm on an up-to-date Pixel 3 in a 'vanilla' state using Chrome, and it does not work for me as well.
- PascalW 7y ago
  On my S10e it indeed doesn't work on Chrome, but it does work on Firefox.
ohazi 7y ago
LG V35. Chrome displays a red square, Firefox displays the wide gamut Android logo. Good job, Google.
skunkworker 7y ago
That android logo is a cool use of Wide Gamut and an easy test on a display. https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LqRniYeVeEk/XOLYEiOcKCI/AAAAAAAAJXI/IAn0yO21XYkwnkUnDlHtdPGI6VyMDEoeACLcBGAs/s1600/android_p3.png https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LqRniYeVeEk/XOLYEiOcKCI/AAAAAAAAJ... If on a Pixel 3 or Samsung Galaxy S10 or another P3 capable display, it's a faint-but-visible red logo. Otherwise it's just solid red. Edit: If not on Android Q, try using Firefox. There seem to be some odd behavior depending on the software and this may not be always consistent.
- marzell 7y ago
  I'm on a Pixel 3. It's just solid red - no faint logo.
  - skunkworker 7y ago
    Odd. I'm on an iPhone XS and it's working for me. It might be included only in the Android Q update. Googling around shows that it might be restricted to custom apps only? "There is one way to bypass this issue, and that is to explicitly tell Chrome to override the default provided system colour profile and just tell it the display is Display P3. This enables colour management in the app, and short of writing a custom application, is the only way to get wide colour gamut content to work on the Pixel 3." https://www.anandtech.com/show/13474/the-google-pixel-3-review/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13474/the-google-pixel-3-revi...
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - XMPPwocky 7y ago
    Save it to your device, and open it from the Photos app. Chrome doesn't seem to like wide color, but Photos does.
    - marzell 7y ago
      So this is interesting... I did this, and it only shows up in the preview/thumbnail view. Once I click on the thumbnail tile to view the image in full screen, it goes back to flat red with no logo.
saagarjha 7y ago
Is it just me, or do the cloud images look different even without a wide color gamut display (I have a MacBook Pro from 2015).
- foolrush 7y ago
  Correct. Haven't looked at the image too deeply, but this is likely the rendering intent being set so something other than the colorimetric offerings, such as Perceptual or Saturation. It could also be a poorly encoded image as well.
  - foolrush 7y ago
    Deeper inspection reveals that both are tagged sRGB, which indicates they are for demonstrative purposes only.
magicalist 7y ago
Does anyone know of any popular camera image formats (ie not raw) that are actually using more than 8 bits per color? The blog post mentions "8 bits per color channel is not enough", but as far as I can tell everyone using Display P3 for consumer-grade photos (including the iPhone) is still using 8 bits per color, just over the wider gamut. It seems weird that this hasn't become a thing with the big marketing push behind HDR10 and others for TV. You might think "backwards compatibility", but Apple was fine making the HEIF break and converting when sharing with incompatible devices.
- foolrush 7y ago
  It's not entirely about bit depth. Think about 1 bit of a given colour light, it can turn on or off, but the bit depth doesn't tell us anything about the colour of the light it is turning on or off. Encoding in a larger volume colour space may require additional bit depth to prevent posterization, but that's somewhat tangential. The larger issue is the number of vendors and operating systems that can't get it right. Windows is horrific, for example, with Android being at least as bad, as given by the accounts in the comments here.
  - magicalist 7y ago
    > It's not entirely about bit depth Are you trying to post the same thing in every top-level thread to get your comment seen? This has nothing to do with what I was asking, which was pretty much "everything about gamut and display aside, what's the deal with bit depth?". Hopefully you can see how your response is a distraction.
- beering 7y ago
  Nobody to my knowledge is using more than 8 bits per color for taking photos. Certainly nobody using JPG (which includes wide-gamut JPEGs from DSLRs), and at least right now not even HEIF on iOS is anything but 8 bits. I'm guessing because it hasn't caused much color-banding for the typical use case (photos) anyways.
  - slashink 7y ago
rplst8 7y ago
So this red Android logo works on my moto x4 running Pie in Firefox, but not in Chrome. Uhhh.
- fenwick67 7y ago
  Yeah my moto g4+ with Firefox shows the Android as well, heh
floatingatoll 7y ago
This post’s replies are a joy to read, as someone who’s been finding and reporting bugs in wide color pipelines for over a decade. You all are encountering completely bog standard normal ICC issues with eyes wide open for the first time and it’s given me a lot of hope for the next five years. App authors and OS builders have refused for a long time to make this a priority - I’m looking at you, Slack - and now finally with both iOS and Android moving forward, I really hope it’ll be enough to finally force them all to suck it up and implement proper ICC handling.
- beering 7y ago
  Truly sRGB has been the best and worst thing to happen to color on computers. Unfortunately there's so much misinformation and bad implementations of color out there that I doubt end-users will ever understand or even notice problems as they come up. I'm really hoping that HDR support will be the driving force behind wide-color adoption, since consumers are more likely to notice when HDR isn't working.
qubitcoder 7y ago
You can force enable wide color support in Chrome via a flag (assuming your display supports wider gamuts, of course). See chrome://flags/#force-color-profile
skybrian 7y ago
After switching to a recent Macbook Pro and making sure it's displaying a wider color gamut (the Android image shows up), I compared the sample images - and didn't see the difference at first. After reading the description, I can see that the colors are a little brighter. But, now that I can see it, I can't bring myself to care. I'd rather forget about it. This won't make my life any better. It's just a way to sell more expensive hardware, much like audiophile gear.
- lm28469 7y ago
  It's the law of diminishing return. We went from "absolute shitty" screens to "very good" screens in 40 years, and from then we went from "very good" to "very good but slightly better if you squint your eyes really hard" in 10 years. It's the same for most consumer tech, and is very noticeable on phones/tablets/laptops. The only thing we can improve on is shaving of .25mm every gen and calling it a revolution. Or adding machine learning + a 8k screen to our smartphones to explain why you need to spend 1000$+ on a 10 core cpu and 8gb of ram. The complexity skyrockets, the price doubles but the user experience barely changes, and sometimes it's not even a positive change. Because at the end of the day the vast majority of people just want a basic camera, spotify, netflix and google maps.
herf 7y ago
There are not two but three cases for the red logo: 1. You have no color management: you see the logo, but it is desaturated 2. You have a working CMS and standard gamut: no logo 3. You have a working CMS and wide gamut: logo is correct #1 is true because the image has different values. #2 maps all the colors to the monitor's gamut and so you can't see anything on a standard display.
jasonkester 7y ago
I really just want Android to stop messing with the camera and let it take pictures. It's getting harder to take a photo without it stripping all the texture from people's faces and blurring out the background, or worse. Here's a video of me moving around on a static background, taken from a tripod. Evidently bending the fabric of the universe as I move: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSlgOwm_eXU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSlgOwm_eXU That's the stock camera app on my brand new Pixel 3a. Since this was taken, I've been experimenting with every setting possible to try to convince it that I don't want to "pop" or be "motion stabilized" but no, there's nothing that will stop it doing this. I'm going to have to return the phone.
- hkai 7y ago
  I watched your video but still couldn't see any particular issue like distortions or apparent problems.
  - jasonkester 7y ago
    Try full screen on a desktop. Watch the texture on the rock near the left hand and hip. It’s not really noticeable on a phone unless you zoom in, but impossible to miss on a big screen.
- jdabney 7y ago
  That is very annoying to watch. What is it trying accomplish?
- MegaButts 7y ago
  That's so weird. Do you know if this is unique to the 3a?
  - jasonkester 7y ago
    I posted this to /r/GooglePixel when I first noticed it, and at least one other person confirmed it was happening with their phone too. I haven't found anything about anybody having the same issue on a regular Pixel 3.
sytelus 7y ago
Looks like iPhone XS already has support for wide gamut. I can see Android logo on red image on Safari as well as Chrome on XS but I can see it bit less bright on sRGB monitors also. https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-review-unveiling-the-silicon-secrets/8 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-re...
- czhiddy 7y ago
  Proper wide-gamut colorspace support has been around on macOS since 2015: https://webkit.org/blog/6682/improving-color-on-the-web/ https://webkit.org/blog/6682/improving-color-on-the-web/
jacobolus 7y ago
So when are web browsers going to start doing proper color management on CSS colors and untagged images? I gave up on pestering them about it 10 years ago after they were largely unreceptive about the topic for several years, but it seems like it’s still a complete shitshow. 10–14 years ago I was grumpy because my laptop display had a smaller gamut than sRGB and everything looked bad (undersaturated). Then there were a few years in between where most of the displays I used were close enough to sRGB that missing color management more-or-less worked out. Now many devices have wide-gamut displays which basically make everything on the web look like oversaturated garbage. Apple had color management more or less figured out on the Mac in the mid 1990s. It is absurd that it is still so hard for software made by gajillion-dollar companies to get the bare basics right >20 years later, especially now that we have superfast GPUs to do compositing in linear space and arbitrarily fancy gamut mapping using floating point arithmetic, brighter and wider-gamut displays, better cameras, ... To the browser vendors: all untagged content must be assumed to be sRGB. If viewers have wider-gamut displays this content must go through a CMS. If viewers want to view wider-gamut images or other content, this must be opt-in. The current behavior breaks color on the web. (Buy a new phone or computer and suddenly nearly every color relationship you see on the web will be different than the designer’s intention.)
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  1) Let X = The color profile assigned to CSS #rrggbb color codes. What is X? 2) Let Y = The color profile assigned to your display. When X does not equal Y, which option should the browser choose for converting colorspace X to colorspace Y for display purposes? a) Relative colormetric b) Absolute colormetric c) Untranslated integers d) Other Then, 3) Let Z = The color profile assigned to CSS HSV/LAB color codes. What is Z? Is it the same as X? I don't envy browser developers any aspect of this problem. If they do it right, no one will notice care. If they do it wrong, the Internet will burn them alive. I can't blame them all for being scared, but I hope that now that we've finally exited the "wild west" of "My display could have any ICC profile under the sun" and are instead approaching "My display is either sRGB or Display P3" that they will, at the very least, decide what to do and then do it and make us all adapt. ps. If you answer question 1 with "X has no assigned color profile", then here's two extra credit questions for you: 4) Should a CSS box with "no colorspace" #ff0000, when displayed on two calibrated displays of equal luminosity but differing (sRGB, P3) color profiles, appear visually identical to the human eye (Safari) or should it be more saturated on P3 (Firefox)? 5) What is the correct CSS declaration to specify P3(r=1.0,g=0.0,b=0.0)? pps. It looks like the CSS working groups are being pushed by both Microsoft and Apple to solve this problem, so eventually they will clearly all standardize on some way to specify colors in non-sRGB, and likely default unspecified colors to sRGB. To which I have to say, "Finally", because maybe then the one outlier will finally align with what I think is right. This is a hard problem, don't get me wrong, it's just frustrating having waited a decade for them to solve this and it's still not solved. ppps. The answer to all of the above questions can likely be found here, once they exit the draft stage someday. The above is all designed to convey the problem in a nutshell to people who aren't familiar with the core problem. If you truly understand and care about this stuff, here you go: CSS Color Module Level 4, W3C Working Draft, 5 March 2019: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/#predefined https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/#predefined 11.2. Predefined colorspaces: srgb, image-p3, a98rgb, prophotorgb and rec2020.

92 points by el_duderino 7y ago

Tarragon 7y ago

I'm amused that chrome on Win10 does not pass their simple red logo test.

curiousgal 7y ago
Chrome vs Firefox on the Pixel 2 https://i.imgur.com/kwirB6C.png https://i.imgur.com/kwirB6C.png
- sp332 7y ago
  Firefox on a Galaxy S8 works. I wonder what the difference could be between two browsers on the same phone?
  - wmf 7y ago
    That's what the article is about: Apps need to use Android APIs correctly to display color accurately.
    - rplst8 7y ago
      So Google Chrome running on Google Android doesn't use the correct Android APIs but Firefox does? Why is Chrome "the standard" again?
      - Semaphor 7y ago
        > Why is Chrome "the standard" again? It has no adblocker.
      - wccrawford 7y ago
        I just set the Chrome flag to force the display profile and was able to see the image on my Pixel 3a. The default profile will not show it. So Chrome is using the APIs, but actually using that profile is still behind a feature flag, it seems. Edit: I just tried it in Firefox and the log is much clearer. This makes me think that Firefox is doing something to change the image before displaying it, which is why it "works" there. On Chrome, the image was incredibly faint.
- zawerf 7y ago
  I am confused about why I can see this screenshot since I am not on a wide gamut monitor. Is firefox doing a weird conversion or the screenshotting tool? My (probably flawed) understanding was that wide colors means there's more than 8 bits. So stuff that would be say rgb(254.5, 0, 0) would now be distinguishable from rgb(255, 0, 0)? If you screenshotted it back to 8 bit you would just lose the extra bits and I expected to still see a red square? Or is that not how it works?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - TwoBit 7y ago
    Yes flawed. If you have a bitmap that's using a wide color space (e. g. P3/OLED) and it has a green (0,1,0) pixel then that's referring to a color than an LCD display cannot possibly show. 0,1,0 on an LCD is a less saturated green. The OS changes color values to try to make things look as much as expected as possible, and that results in color clipping. A screenshot saves images as sRGB and so no remapping is done upon display.
LeoPanthera 7y ago
You must have a wide-color-gamut compatible monitor in order for the test to even be possible. Most laptops and desktops do not. Safari on my iPhone X passes.
- foolrush 7y ago
  And have properly set up colour management working, which on Windows is close to zero percent probability. This also ignores the shortcuts that Chrome and other browsers have taken on their road to colour management.
  - beering 7y ago
    > And have properly set up colour management working, which on Windows is close to zero percent probability. Maybe surprising to some, but Windows actually supports HDR10 (which includes "wide-gamut" color) better than other OSes. You can, for example, play HDR10 video games with a connected HDR-capable monitor. It might be thanks to MS's Xbox platform.
Jonnax 7y ago
Do you have a HDR display? Have you enabled Wide Colour Gamut?
mey 7y ago
A lot of variables involved. For me Win 10 17134, with an NVidia GTX 960, over displayport to Dell U2417H, I can see the two colors in Chrome and Firefox. I can't see the color difference in Microsoft Edge. The ICC Profile for the monitor was automatically loaded by Windows. Everything is 32 bit. I think the ICC profile is the only reason I can see it and it isn't a very strong difference on my monitor. Edit: When I say 32bit, I mean 8 bit per RGB channel/24 bit "True Color"

hayksaakian 7y ago

They say that an S10 should see it but my S10 with up to date Google Chrome doesn't show the android logo in the red image. Funny enough I can see it just fine on my Macbook Pro running the latest Firefox stable.

guelo 7y ago
On my S10+ it works on Firefox but not Chrome or Samsung's browser.
marzell 7y ago
I'm on an up-to-date Pixel 3 in a 'vanilla' state using Chrome, and it does not work for me as well.
PascalW 7y ago
On my S10e it indeed doesn't work on Chrome, but it does work on Firefox.

ohazi 7y ago

LG V35. Chrome displays a red square, Firefox displays the wide gamut Android logo. Good job, Google.

skunkworker 7y ago

That android logo is a cool use of Wide Gamut and an easy test on a display. https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LqRniYeVeEk/XOLYEiOcKCI/AAAAAAAAJXI/IAn0yO21XYkwnkUnDlHtdPGI6VyMDEoeACLcBGAs/s1600/android_p3.png https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LqRniYeVeEk/XOLYEiOcKCI/AAAAAAAAJ... If on a Pixel 3 or Samsung Galaxy S10 or another P3 capable display, it's a faint-but-visible red logo. Otherwise it's just solid red. Edit: If not on Android Q, try using Firefox. There seem to be some odd behavior depending on the software and this may not be always consistent.

marzell 7y ago
I'm on a Pixel 3. It's just solid red - no faint logo.
- skunkworker 7y ago
  Odd. I'm on an iPhone XS and it's working for me. It might be included only in the Android Q update. Googling around shows that it might be restricted to custom apps only? "There is one way to bypass this issue, and that is to explicitly tell Chrome to override the default provided system colour profile and just tell it the display is Display P3. This enables colour management in the app, and short of writing a custom application, is the only way to get wide colour gamut content to work on the Pixel 3." https://www.anandtech.com/show/13474/the-google-pixel-3-review/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13474/the-google-pixel-3-revi...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- XMPPwocky 7y ago
  Save it to your device, and open it from the Photos app. Chrome doesn't seem to like wide color, but Photos does.
  - marzell 7y ago
    So this is interesting... I did this, and it only shows up in the preview/thumbnail view. Once I click on the thumbnail tile to view the image in full screen, it goes back to flat red with no logo.

saagarjha 7y ago

Is it just me, or do the cloud images look different even without a wide color gamut display (I have a MacBook Pro from 2015).

foolrush 7y ago
Correct. Haven't looked at the image too deeply, but this is likely the rendering intent being set so something other than the colorimetric offerings, such as Perceptual or Saturation. It could also be a poorly encoded image as well.
- foolrush 7y ago
  Deeper inspection reveals that both are tagged sRGB, which indicates they are for demonstrative purposes only.

magicalist 7y ago

Does anyone know of any popular camera image formats (ie not raw) that are actually using more than 8 bits per color? The blog post mentions "8 bits per color channel is not enough", but as far as I can tell everyone using Display P3 for consumer-grade photos (including the iPhone) is still using 8 bits per color, just over the wider gamut. It seems weird that this hasn't become a thing with the big marketing push behind HDR10 and others for TV. You might think "backwards compatibility", but Apple was fine making the HEIF break and converting when sharing with incompatible devices.

foolrush 7y ago
It's not entirely about bit depth. Think about 1 bit of a given colour light, it can turn on or off, but the bit depth doesn't tell us anything about the colour of the light it is turning on or off. Encoding in a larger volume colour space may require additional bit depth to prevent posterization, but that's somewhat tangential. The larger issue is the number of vendors and operating systems that can't get it right. Windows is horrific, for example, with Android being at least as bad, as given by the accounts in the comments here.
- magicalist 7y ago
  > It's not entirely about bit depth Are you trying to post the same thing in every top-level thread to get your comment seen? This has nothing to do with what I was asking, which was pretty much "everything about gamut and display aside, what's the deal with bit depth?". Hopefully you can see how your response is a distraction.
beering 7y ago
Nobody to my knowledge is using more than 8 bits per color for taking photos. Certainly nobody using JPG (which includes wide-gamut JPEGs from DSLRs), and at least right now not even HEIF on iOS is anything but 8 bits. I'm guessing because it hasn't caused much color-banding for the typical use case (photos) anyways.
- slashink 7y ago

rplst8 7y ago

So this red Android logo works on my moto x4 running Pie in Firefox, but not in Chrome. Uhhh.

fenwick67 7y ago
Yeah my moto g4+ with Firefox shows the Android as well, heh

floatingatoll 7y ago

This post’s replies are a joy to read, as someone who’s been finding and reporting bugs in wide color pipelines for over a decade. You all are encountering completely bog standard normal ICC issues with eyes wide open for the first time and it’s given me a lot of hope for the next five years. App authors and OS builders have refused for a long time to make this a priority - I’m looking at you, Slack - and now finally with both iOS and Android moving forward, I really hope it’ll be enough to finally force them all to suck it up and implement proper ICC handling.

beering 7y ago
Truly sRGB has been the best and worst thing to happen to color on computers. Unfortunately there's so much misinformation and bad implementations of color out there that I doubt end-users will ever understand or even notice problems as they come up. I'm really hoping that HDR support will be the driving force behind wide-color adoption, since consumers are more likely to notice when HDR isn't working.

qubitcoder 7y ago

You can force enable wide color support in Chrome via a flag (assuming your display supports wider gamuts, of course). See chrome://flags/#force-color-profile

skybrian 7y ago

After switching to a recent Macbook Pro and making sure it's displaying a wider color gamut (the Android image shows up), I compared the sample images - and didn't see the difference at first. After reading the description, I can see that the colors are a little brighter. But, now that I can see it, I can't bring myself to care. I'd rather forget about it. This won't make my life any better. It's just a way to sell more expensive hardware, much like audiophile gear.

lm28469 7y ago
It's the law of diminishing return. We went from "absolute shitty" screens to "very good" screens in 40 years, and from then we went from "very good" to "very good but slightly better if you squint your eyes really hard" in 10 years. It's the same for most consumer tech, and is very noticeable on phones/tablets/laptops. The only thing we can improve on is shaving of .25mm every gen and calling it a revolution. Or adding machine learning + a 8k screen to our smartphones to explain why you need to spend 1000$+ on a 10 core cpu and 8gb of ram. The complexity skyrockets, the price doubles but the user experience barely changes, and sometimes it's not even a positive change. Because at the end of the day the vast majority of people just want a basic camera, spotify, netflix and google maps.

herf 7y ago

There are not two but three cases for the red logo: 1. You have no color management: you see the logo, but it is desaturated 2. You have a working CMS and standard gamut: no logo 3. You have a working CMS and wide gamut: logo is correct #1 is true because the image has different values. #2 maps all the colors to the monitor's gamut and so you can't see anything on a standard display.

jasonkester 7y ago

I really just want Android to stop messing with the camera and let it take pictures. It's getting harder to take a photo without it stripping all the texture from people's faces and blurring out the background, or worse. Here's a video of me moving around on a static background, taken from a tripod. Evidently bending the fabric of the universe as I move: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSlgOwm_eXU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSlgOwm_eXU That's the stock camera app on my brand new Pixel 3a. Since this was taken, I've been experimenting with every setting possible to try to convince it that I don't want to "pop" or be "motion stabilized" but no, there's nothing that will stop it doing this. I'm going to have to return the phone.

hkai 7y ago
I watched your video but still couldn't see any particular issue like distortions or apparent problems.
- jasonkester 7y ago
  Try full screen on a desktop. Watch the texture on the rock near the left hand and hip. It’s not really noticeable on a phone unless you zoom in, but impossible to miss on a big screen.
jdabney 7y ago
That is very annoying to watch. What is it trying accomplish?
MegaButts 7y ago
That's so weird. Do you know if this is unique to the 3a?
- jasonkester 7y ago
  I posted this to /r/GooglePixel when I first noticed it, and at least one other person confirmed it was happening with their phone too. I haven't found anything about anybody having the same issue on a regular Pixel 3.

sytelus 7y ago

Looks like iPhone XS already has support for wide gamut. I can see Android logo on red image on Safari as well as Chrome on XS but I can see it bit less bright on sRGB monitors also. https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-review-unveiling-the-silicon-secrets/8 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-re...

czhiddy 7y ago
Proper wide-gamut colorspace support has been around on macOS since 2015: https://webkit.org/blog/6682/improving-color-on-the-web/ https://webkit.org/blog/6682/improving-color-on-the-web/

jacobolus 7y ago

So when are web browsers going to start doing proper color management on CSS colors and untagged images? I gave up on pestering them about it 10 years ago after they were largely unreceptive about the topic for several years, but it seems like it’s still a complete shitshow. 10–14 years ago I was grumpy because my laptop display had a smaller gamut than sRGB and everything looked bad (undersaturated). Then there were a few years in between where most of the displays I used were close enough to sRGB that missing color management more-or-less worked out. Now many devices have wide-gamut displays which basically make everything on the web look like oversaturated garbage. Apple had color management more or less figured out on the Mac in the mid 1990s. It is absurd that it is still so hard for software made by gajillion-dollar companies to get the bare basics right >20 years later, especially now that we have superfast GPUs to do compositing in linear space and arbitrarily fancy gamut mapping using floating point arithmetic, brighter and wider-gamut displays, better cameras, ... To the browser vendors: all untagged content must be assumed to be sRGB. If viewers have wider-gamut displays this content must go through a CMS. If viewers want to view wider-gamut images or other content, this must be opt-in. The current behavior breaks color on the web. (Buy a new phone or computer and suddenly nearly every color relationship you see on the web will be different than the designer’s intention.)

floatingatoll 7y ago
1) Let X = The color profile assigned to CSS #rrggbb color codes. What is X? 2) Let Y = The color profile assigned to your display. When X does not equal Y, which option should the browser choose for converting colorspace X to colorspace Y for display purposes? a) Relative colormetric b) Absolute colormetric c) Untranslated integers d) Other Then, 3) Let Z = The color profile assigned to CSS HSV/LAB color codes. What is Z? Is it the same as X? I don't envy browser developers any aspect of this problem. If they do it right, no one will notice care. If they do it wrong, the Internet will burn them alive. I can't blame them all for being scared, but I hope that now that we've finally exited the "wild west" of "My display could have any ICC profile under the sun" and are instead approaching "My display is either sRGB or Display P3" that they will, at the very least, decide what to do and then do it and make us all adapt. ps. If you answer question 1 with "X has no assigned color profile", then here's two extra credit questions for you: 4) Should a CSS box with "no colorspace" #ff0000, when displayed on two calibrated displays of equal luminosity but differing (sRGB, P3) color profiles, appear visually identical to the human eye (Safari) or should it be more saturated on P3 (Firefox)? 5) What is the correct CSS declaration to specify P3(r=1.0,g=0.0,b=0.0)? pps. It looks like the CSS working groups are being pushed by both Microsoft and Apple to solve this problem, so eventually they will clearly all standardize on some way to specify colors in non-sRGB, and likely default unspecified colors to sRGB. To which I have to say, "Finally", because maybe then the one outlier will finally align with what I think is right. This is a hard problem, don't get me wrong, it's just frustrating having waited a decade for them to solve this and it's still not solved. ppps. The answer to all of the above questions can likely be found here, once they exit the draft stage someday. The above is all designed to convey the problem in a nutshell to people who aren't familiar with the core problem. If you truly understand and care about this stuff, here you go: CSS Color Module Level 4, W3C Working Draft, 5 March 2019: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/#predefined https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/#predefined 11.2. Predefined colorspaces: srgb, image-p3, a98rgb, prophotorgb and rec2020.