2 ms·
"Unicode for pixels" would be something like Rec.2020 color (with some specific high depth and HDR solution defined) used in all APIs that take pixels. Currentl
by pornel 2y ago
"Unicode for pixels" would be something like Rec.2020 color (with some specific high depth and HDR solution defined) used in all APIs that take pixels. Currently sRGB is the closest to a universal default, but that's ASCII of pixels.
You need a monitor profile because the display protocol takes dumb numeric values that are interpreted in monitor-specific way, instead of being sent in some universal color space, and converted to monitor's internal format by the monitor itself.
In this analogy monitors are like pre-Unicode printers, where characters were just bytes, and the bytes mapped to whatever 8-bit language-specific font the printer had.
- hnlmorg 2y agoYou’re assuming that monitors and printers can be trusted to accurately reproduce the colour space even if there was a profile attached (which, by the way, most monitors do actually have). This isn’t true. Particularly with monitors where people can adjust the contract and brightness. The reason colour profiles exist is so that computers can be calibrated to support the monitor output. You are also ignoring the fact that environmental factors can have an effect too. Ie how the room is lit. Comparing something standardised like writing glyphs with something highly individual (monitor calibration) doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.