W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2001

Re: The visual accuracy of sRGB defined images

From: Wild Cat <wild@farlep.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:59:26 +0300
Message-ID: <3B0D21CE.BED74DF4@farlep.net>
CC: "'www-style@w3.org'" <www-style@w3.org>
Hello

I'm not any close to professional in this question although I do
graphics for the web.

This is true that it is something with what we've probably put up and
don't just spend nerves on it any more?... But providing more accuracy
would definitely be great and, I'm sure, picked up by majority of
webmasters (if it'll be an open technology of course).

Question:
Many users can't see any colors accurate even if it's not about Internet
because of improper monitor color profile calibration (in this part of
the world at least - exUSSR). Does your idea bypass somehow this issue?
How will you bypass ICC profiles for the system? Or will it be a new
system module? Will it be compatible with any device or...?

Do you know about Colorific (R) True Internet Color (TM) technology? 
( http://www.colorific.com )
It is based on providing a user with an util to set up the ICC profile
corresponding to some technology used on the sites, then you are
guaranteed to see things the way they are, they say. Bad news is that it
is a commercial thing, so I've never heard about it before or after
testing a Samsung monitor with which it came.

Is you method different in principle? Will it require special modules
for both author and "user"?

Well, probably too much questions but it seems to me answers to all of
them will define the demand for it. Because the method itself sounds
like a great idea but future use will depend probably on "does it became
common?"

Shortly, as a middling web-desinger can say "yes, we need it!" but only
if majority our "users" can use it.

Please answer if you can because what you proposed does sound
interesting


Wild Cat

David Oulton wrote:
> 
> I need to establish how many users are disatisfied with the image fidelity
> of sRGB / ICC profile defined images.
> 
> I believe there is a fundamental over-simplification in the use of Gamma to
> describe device / image characteristics, and that there is a conceptually
> simple alternative that is much more accurate.
> 
> Does anyone out there need it ?
> 
> David P. Oulton
> Univ Manchester Institute of Science and Technology
> 
> E-Mail : david.oulton@umist.ac.uk

-- 
*****The flame of Love is burning Always!*****
If you want to make me a gift, see my gift list:
http://www.cdnow.com/gift/syamith_cohiny@yahoo.com
************************************************
http://move.to/Avalon @@@ http://wildcat.i.am
			wildcat@ematic.com
Rescue e-mailto:	wild_cat@ukr.net
			wild@farlep.net
+++++++++++++++++SYAMITH+COHINY+++++++++++++++++
Received on Friday, 25 May 2001 10:55:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:09 GMT