3 ms·

"macOS has much better colour handling than windows". How is that ? Do you just mean apple screens have a better color calibration when you get them ? Or the OS

"macOS has much better colour handling than windows". How is that ? Do you just mean apple screens have a better color calibration when you get them ? Or the OS come with some tools to handles colors in some ways Windows can't ?

dagmx 4y ago
Windows has fairly poor colour management throughout the OS. If you stick to apps that are specifically colour managed, and manage your own screen profiles, it’s fine, but compare it to the Mac where: * you get much better EDR/HDR support at the OS level, so it tries to handle perceptual EDR ranges when apps switch to EDR. * the OS itself has better management for colour profiles for the screen (also better refresh rate management when it comes to common film rates) * Macs come with P3 colour handling for their first party displays https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT210435 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT210435 , and while you can colour manage a windows/Linux machine post facto, it’s nice to have a system come with a good baseline that reflects their screen properties. For example, coordinators don’t need colour accuracy BUT it does help when their laptops present it well. Most desktop users would use an Eizo instead. * safari does a better job than chrome/Firefox at handling embedded image colour metadata , and also managing EDR colour. * similarly Preview, QuickTime and Finder are better at respecting embedded colour profiles and EDR where applicable than Windows Media Viewer and Explorer. Most of this can of course be replicated on Windows, but you have to go out of your way to do so. Plus you’d still lack the macs EDR handling that is great for review sessions etc… macOS doesn’t cover everything of course. Images with custom LUTs still need their own viewer apps, but I can’t emphasize how nice it is to have much more trust in what you’re seeing and reducing the mental friction while doing a lot of your ancillary work outside specific apps. It’s not perfect, but so much better then Windows where it’s a crapshoot what colour you’re going to see depending on how you view it.
yurishimo 4y ago
It's a mixture of the calibration and the quality of the panel. You can have a color accurate panel that you calibrate if yourself, but if the max output is 250nits it won't be useful.

dagmx 4y ago

Windows has fairly poor colour management throughout the OS. If you stick to apps that are specifically colour managed, and manage your own screen profiles, it’s fine, but compare it to the Mac where: * you get much better EDR/HDR support at the OS level, so it tries to handle perceptual EDR ranges when apps switch to EDR. * the OS itself has better management for colour profiles for the screen (also better refresh rate management when it comes to common film rates) * Macs come with P3 colour handling for their first party displays https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT210435 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT210435 , and while you can colour manage a windows/Linux machine post facto, it’s nice to have a system come with a good baseline that reflects their screen properties. For example, coordinators don’t need colour accuracy BUT it does help when their laptops present it well. Most desktop users would use an Eizo instead. * safari does a better job than chrome/Firefox at handling embedded image colour metadata , and also managing EDR colour. * similarly Preview, QuickTime and Finder are better at respecting embedded colour profiles and EDR where applicable than Windows Media Viewer and Explorer. Most of this can of course be replicated on Windows, but you have to go out of your way to do so. Plus you’d still lack the macs EDR handling that is great for review sessions etc… macOS doesn’t cover everything of course. Images with custom LUTs still need their own viewer apps, but I can’t emphasize how nice it is to have much more trust in what you’re seeing and reducing the mental friction while doing a lot of your ancillary work outside specific apps. It’s not perfect, but so much better then Windows where it’s a crapshoot what colour you’re going to see depending on how you view it.

yurishimo 4y ago

It's a mixture of the calibration and the quality of the panel. You can have a color accurate panel that you calibrate if yourself, but if the max output is 250nits it won't be useful.