Re: Wide Color Gamut and High Dynamic Range displays

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Browsers *do* handle wide-gamut images, when they're appropriately
> >> tagged and going straight to the screen.
> >
> > Can you give an example where that is happening?
> > It would be odd to have part of a document displayed with a different
> > profile.
>
> No, because I have neither a wide-gamut monitor nor any wide-gamut
> images, so I've no way to tell if any example I draw up would actually
> work.
>
> But, per previous conversations with Noel on our Sydney team, we do
> indeed send wide-gamut images through to the monitor when they're not
> being composited with anything else.


Maybe Noel can give an example? If this is already turned on in Chrome,
authors should be informed.

Even if the input and output have a wide gamut, you'd still need to do
color management as the profile of the display will not match the one of
the picture.


>
> >> And we (Chrome) are working
> >> on making it composite properly, too, though that's difficult.
> >
> > Yes, the only way to do this would be to composite the whole page in a
> > difference colorspace which requires a lot of transformations of the sRGB
> > elements.
> > I believe only Apple has the framework in place to support this.
>
> Yeah, like I said, we're working on it.  It involves either clever
> tricks, or blowing up the size of images in texture memory, or both.


Cool. would be nice to see an architecture document on this.

For Mark's use case, if the video is in full-screen mode and the attached
display profile can be matched with a video stream, the pixel could simply
be pushed through with no additional manipulation.