W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2009

Re: Color correction in video, check

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:37:59 -0800
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Message-Id: <6D2CB3C2-2286-4A1C-ACCB-97CED6AFDC54@apple.com>
To: Frank Olivier <franko@microsoft.com>
We're trying to move away from that, and have consistent treatment of  
untagged as presuming a specific single tag on all platforms, rather  
than presuming 'platform'.

On Nov 3, 2009, at 13:16 , Frank Olivier wrote:

> My initial reaction:
> I would rather have untagged video behave exactly the same as  
> untagged images (in the absence of any color profile data) - so  
> don't apply any color correction (aka assume that the content is  
> already in display/output-space/draw the raw color values to the  
> screen)
> Frank Olivier
> Internet Explorer, Microsoft
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org]  
> On Behalf Of Dave Singer
> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 12:09 PM
> Cc: Daniel Glazman
> Subject: Color correction in video, check
> In a CSS working group discussion today, we discussed color correction
> as it applies to colors in CSS and untagged images.  The question came
> up as to how untagged video should be treated.  We'd like to say that
> it is treated as being sRGB (consistently), as this generally matches
> 709 colors.  The question is, is this OK?
> Consistent treatment means that if it's wrong, the author will notice,
> whereas if we leave it to 'platform color' (i.e. uncorrected), it may
> look 'right' on the author's platform but wrong elsewhere.
> David Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standard, Apple Inc.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standard, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2009 21:38:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:02 UTC