- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 09:47:33 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> So, should [a tagged image] go directly to the monitor profile, or use sRGB as an >> in-between? It makes a big difference. > > Sorry, my answer had a parallel structure to your question, so I > assumed it was clear. > > The colors should be sRGB internally, until the last moment when > they're sent to the display. > > Trying to store colors in a monitor profile before that is just > terrible, as it means you have to do tricky things when a window moves > between monitors (or crosses them!). > > It also means that things that can examine the colors, like a <canvas> > with an image painted into it, see a weird result, which is also a > pretty major entropy link for fingerprinting purposes. If everything is mapped through sRGB internally, doesn't that mean wide-gamut images will be compressed to the sRGB space even when the monitor profile would accommodate them? That seems unlikely to be what authors of wide-gamut content would want (consider high-end photographic galleries, for instance). It would seem more appropriate to me to store images in the *image* color space until the last moment and then map them directly to the display space. (For <canvas>, at least right now, mapping to sRGB upon pixel readback does seem like the Right Thing, but down the road we may want a way to establish a different working space...) zw
Received on Saturday, 7 December 2013 14:47:59 UTC