4 ms·
> A similar problem comes up when trying to manage color gamut on screens and systems that are intentionally blown out to look vivid, vibrant, shiny… looking at
by saghm 5y ago
> A similar problem comes up when trying to manage color gamut on screens and systems that are intentionally blown out to look vivid, vibrant, shiny… looking at you Samsung phones. Any properly color-managed image there looks incredibly dull compared to the bright defaults you’ve grown accustomed to. If we take 0xff red to mean “full sRGB red”, that’s much less bright these days than if we just assume it means “as red as the screen will go.” It’s much like how TVs are (hopefully were?) set in the store in bright shiny mode to induce you to buy them, not set to reproduce colors accurately.
I remember when the Pixel 2 came out, there was a minor kerfuffle over it defaulting to using sRGB. It got overshadowed a bit due to some of the more severe issues people ran into with the early batch, but it still apparently got enough of a backlash for them to patch it shortly after to update to a compromise between what I think it called "natural" and "vivid". At the time, I had never paid much attention to color profiles, so my roommate suggested I enable sRGB (which was in the developer settings on the original Pixel) for a week and see if I preferred it. It turns out I do actually prefer it, so now I've used it on whichever phone I've had since then!
- tadfisher 5y agoUnmanaged color on wide-gamut outputs is simply godawful. I'm not surprised consumers go for it in direct comparisons, but especially with dark color schemes in vogue it seriously hampers usability by crushing darker shades (at least when lerping to DCI-P3). TVs and monitors are pretty bad as well, but at least more wide-gamut source material is becoming available and calibration to DCI-P3 or Rec.709 is starting to become a selling point.