"Here’s another example, this time with a generated image. To users on an sRGB display there is a uniform red square below. However, it’s a bit of a trick. There are actually two different shades of red in that image, one of which is only distinct on wide-gamut displays. On such a display you’ll see a faint WebKit logo inside the red square."
Its a RED square not ORANGE. Please fix the post please. Its also quite worrying that you get something so simple so wrong, such as copy and pasting from another website that I wonder how much else you get so wrong in your articles.
Unless there are subtler hues in between that are invisible on my display, the square background's a solid red: FF0000 (RGB as 8-bit hex value, using your Digitalcolor Meter app) while the compass logo is a slightly deeper F10000. I am viewing it on a very old iMac (Summer 2007).
I see a red square -- no logo -- on my iPad Pro. That is a bit disconcerting.
(As an aside, and on the topic of displays, I sent back my brand new, 2-day old MacBook Pro late last week because colors were not displaying correctly. There was a deeply yellow-ish tint, rather than white, to page backgrounds. Apple recognized this as an issue, and took it back for replacement with no questions at all.)
OK, something must be up with that square image, it's pretty disheartening.
I can see it on both my Galaxy devices but not on my iPhones.
From left to right: Galaxy S5, S4, iPhone 5c, iPhone 6.
Hmm, maybe this has to do with OLED displays.
I have literally no idea what's going on as my iPhone 5c CAN see the logo perfectly and the box is orange. Something not right here Strange
Wow, that's interesting because my box is red. From reading the comments, it looks as though some people see it as red and others as orange, must be a display issue.
But I see it as Red across all my devices including my desktop monitor.
I have literally no idea what's going on as my iPhone 5c CAN see the logo perfectly and the box is orange. Something not right here Strange
Different devices have different display profiles, the logo in the sample image can be shown on any quality of display with a particular profile. If Mac users go into system prefs > display > color and flip through the profiles (wait for them to load), some profiles will show the logo, others won't. Every profile prioritizes different colors so while one may show better reds, it may show worse greens or blues. Eyes are not all equally sensitive to different colors either:
"We see colour in Red, Green and Blue values but that does not mean that we are therefore equally sensitive to all three. We have evolved on a planet awash with blue light and as a result evolution has given us eyes that are only half as sensitive to blue as they are to red and green to help compensate. This 40% Red, 40% Green, but only 20% Blue sensitivity in the cones at the back of the eye results in us seeing blue as a dark colour. This is of benefit in nature, but with the invention of printing it has resulted in a real problem. We just can not produce blue dyes, inks and paints that are of a strong enough colour to compete with the extra sensitivity we have to red and green. For some reason we also have a stronger reaction to green than to red. The combination of RGB makes white, but of the three, green is the brightest, followed by red, and blue being the darkest."
The most widely used display setups and profiles are chosen based on what looks best for the majority of people. People who have atypical variations in color sensitivity due to variations in the cones in the eye see different colors:
Different software also has different interpretations so while some devices will show the image ok in the browser, if you drag it out to the desktop and look at it in QuickLook or some other software (photo library on iOS), it may interpret it differently as it has a different working color space.
These profiles are mapping the data stored in the file into a different color range like if you open the image in Photoshop and do image > adjustments > levels and pull one of the sliders over to the right, it will compress the color values into that range and show up the logo. This will also affect other colors though.
The point of the image is to highlight the benefit of having a wide gamut display, it doesn't mean you will always have a wide gamut display if you can see the logo as you can see the logo on a poor quality display calibrated with a specific profile. The benefit of having a wide gamut in the hardware means it can show a larger range of colors at the same time.
I can see the logo on my antique SCEPTRE display. I know what HDR is but showing an image with only 2 colors in it (that's what it looked to my crappy tools) is not a good way to show it off. I would be more interested in seeing several copies of the same image side by side, where each was tuned to show a part of the color range on my 'normal' display-range monitor. Sort of like zooming in to a high resolution image to show us poor slobs what we're missing.
Is it just me or is the author a little bit hostile about non-apple products? Did we really need to hear about how water soluble the competitor's devices were? I'm more interested in the concept of high range color displays than whether the competitors are going to catch up to Apple any time soon. I'm sure the competitors are ahead of Apple in SOME detail.
The large gamut of OLED would show it, DOESN:T MEAN YOUR SEEING THE RIGHT COLORS, THE RIGHT INTENSITY, ETC.
Did you just register to say this crap?
No but it's a valid point to bring it up since the image is used as an example.
Calm down, btw.
No it's not, it provides essentially no explanation. it's not a point (except maybe a data point); more like a non sequitur.. You can also see it if your device's color profile is completely off (though then all your other colors will be totally off). That was ALSO the case for many early Samsung phones and even now those colors are still off in their large GAMUT setting (So double chance of seeing it).
And say calm down to your own children/pet and spare me your condescending pap.
Comments
"Here’s another example, this time with a generated image. To users on an sRGB display there is a uniform red square below. However, it’s a bit of a trick. There are actually two different shades of red in that image, one of which is only distinct on wide-gamut displays. On such a display you’ll see a faint WebKit logo inside the red square."
Its a RED square not ORANGE. Please fix the post please. Its also quite worrying that you get something so simple so wrong, such as copy and pasting from another website that I wonder how much else you get so wrong in your articles.
Thanks.
(As an aside, and on the topic of displays, I sent back my brand new, 2-day old MacBook Pro late last week because colors were not displaying correctly. There was a deeply yellow-ish tint, rather than white, to page backgrounds. Apple recognized this as an issue, and took it back for replacement with no questions at all.)
Wow, that's interesting because my box is red. From reading the comments, it looks as though some people see it as red and others as orange, must be a display issue.
But I see it as Red across all my devices including my desktop monitor.
I actually wish they'd continue develop the 5c, imo the spiritual successor to the classic "plasticy" iPod.
http://www.shutha.org/node/809
"We see colour in Red, Green and Blue values but that does not mean that we are therefore equally sensitive to all three. We have evolved on a planet awash with blue light and as a result evolution has given us eyes that are only half as sensitive to blue as they are to red and green to help compensate. This 40% Red, 40% Green, but only 20% Blue sensitivity in the cones at the back of the eye results in us seeing blue as a dark colour. This is of benefit in nature, but with the invention of printing it has resulted in a real problem. We just can not produce blue dyes, inks and paints that are of a strong enough colour to compete with the extra sensitivity we have to red and green. For some reason we also have a stronger reaction to green than to red. The combination of RGB makes white, but of the three, green is the brightest, followed by red, and blue being the darkest."
The most widely used display setups and profiles are chosen based on what looks best for the majority of people. People who have atypical variations in color sensitivity due to variations in the cones in the eye see different colors:
http://www.colourblindawareness.org/colour-blindness/colour-blindness-experience-it/
Different software also has different interpretations so while some devices will show the image ok in the browser, if you drag it out to the desktop and look at it in QuickLook or some other software (photo library on iOS), it may interpret it differently as it has a different working color space.
These profiles are mapping the data stored in the file into a different color range like if you open the image in Photoshop and do image > adjustments > levels and pull one of the sliders over to the right, it will compress the color values into that range and show up the logo. This will also affect other colors though.
The point of the image is to highlight the benefit of having a wide gamut display, it doesn't mean you will always have a wide gamut display if you can see the logo as you can see the logo on a poor quality display calibrated with a specific profile. The benefit of having a wide gamut in the hardware means it can show a larger range of colors at the same time.
Is it just me or is the author a little bit hostile about non-apple products? Did we really need to hear about how water soluble the competitor's devices were? I'm more interested in the concept of high range color displays than whether the competitors are going to catch up to Apple any time soon. I'm sure the competitors are ahead of Apple in SOME detail.
You can also see it if your device's color profile is completely off (though then all your other colors will be totally off).
That was ALSO the case for many early Samsung phones and even now those colors are still off in their large GAMUT setting
(So double chance of seeing it).
And say calm down to your own children/pet and spare me your condescending pap.
http://i.imgur.com/XhKn6KY.jpg