What's in the AdobeRGB profile? (Q related to Samsung XL20/XL30 displays)

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>Has anyone dissected the AdobeRGB profile, or knows what it actually contains?</p>

<p>The reason I'm asking: I have the Samsung XL20 display, which covers some 113% of AdobeRGB, so I usually just work in this color space. XL20 offers the option to calibrate 4 profiles and save them directly into the display: one profile covers the whole gamut of the display (for massochists who love overly deep reds), the others are sRGB, Adobe RGB and 'emulation'. In emulation mode one can store any color space with a smaller gamut (say, of a printer or another display). It's also possible to specify the parameters manually (green, red, blue, white and black point, gamma, luminosity) - see screenshot so you know how it works.</p>

<p>I figured I just save the AdobeRGB profile in both the dedicated AdobeRGB mode and emulation mode, with different luminosity. One can't do that directly, because trying to emulate AdobeRGB just stores the profile in the AdobeRGB mode automatically. So instead, I open the AdobeRGB ICC profile in the setup interface of the display, tweak the settings a bit so it's no longer recognized as AdobeRGB, then set the points back so it's the same as AdobeRGB. Then I save the profile for emulation.</p>

<p>After this, switching between AdobeRGB and emulation modes on my display should give me exactly the same picture - but it doesn't. The emulation mode clearly has more definition in dark areas.</p>

<p>This leads me to a conclusion, that the AdobeRGB ICC profile contains some more information than what can be entered manually. Can anyone confirm that? What exactly is different? My display's software recognized the AdobeRGB ICC most likely by the Adobe's copyright. Is there any way to obtain and exact copy of Adobe's ICC profile but without the copyright (only for my own purposes, to use it for calibration of the emulation mode of my display)?</p>

<p>Of course it's also possible that the display or software behaves differently with different profile, but that doesn't make much sense. Also, I tried recalibrating the display (in AdobeRGB mode) with X-Rite software and there was no change, so apparently the display's interpretation of AdobeRGB is correct.</p>

<p>Comments?</p>

<p>All matrix profiles are very simple and describe a white point, the three chromaticity values for RGB and a TRC (gamma) setting. You can see all the values by simply selecting it in the Photoshop Color Settings and clicking on “Edit” where a dialog will appear with all the values above. </p>

<p>That said, there’s about zero reason to mess with any of the settings (after which, its not Adobe RGB any more). Nor does the working space have to have anything to do with the display, display calibration etc. The display and the editing of images is totally independent and has been since Photoshop 5. Calibrate and profile your display and move on. </p>

<p>Well, it does have have something to do with my display... Some Eizo displays use the same philosophy. Having the display take care of most stuff is quite a good idea actually. Want to see how it's going to look on a different display or in sRGB color space? Just press a button.</p>

<p>But I'd like to know whether the AdobeRGB ICC profile is any different than what I understand and what you describe (a simple profile with just a few points defined). I guess I'll have to contact Samsung to know.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Well, it does have have something to do with my display...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, it doesn’t. If it did, if your display produce exactly Adobe RGB (1998) (which is a synthetic, solely mathematical color space) you wouldn’t have to messing around with Colorimeters, software and building profiles. Since Photoshop 5, the display conditions and the working space have been divorced. You calibrate and profile your display, a profile defining that condition exists, allowing you to work in any color space (RGB or CMYK), Display Using Monitor Compensation is used to produce the correct preview of that color space upon your display using that display profile. <br>

Many applications are not ICC aware. They look awful with a wide gamut display. So your unit, the Eizo and my NEC allow one to switch to an sRGB behavior (not really, its a simulation and unless you have something like the HP DreamColor, you can’t alter the actual chromaticity of the display). If you see butt ugly previews in say a non ICC aware web browser because you’re dealing with a wide gamut unit, you set it to simulate sRGB and it doesn’t look awful. But its not color managed at this point and in a way, it doesn’t matter because in ICC aware applications, as long as the document has an embedded profile and you have a profile that defines your display, you’ll get proper previews. </p>

<p>Best to start here:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/phscs2ip_colspace.pdf">The Role of working spaces in Adobe applicaitons</a></p>

<p>Andrew, I think I know what color spaces are. Let me repeat what some displays do: they let themselves be calibrated to a particular colorspace/profile and save that setting *directly* into the display - so the display acts like a true AdobeRGB device (or some other emulated device). That means you don't need to specify a monitor profile, or just use AdobeRGB ICC profile as a descriptor of the display. Of course it's only a preview and doesn't change the actual color space you work in, I didn't say that. But that preview is calibrated.</p>

<p>It may sound weird to industry veterans, but it works - it's basically the same like changing output profiles in the application, only it's done inside the monitor (including using emulation of other color spaces). Perhaps not 'mathematically' correct (which it can't be anyway, since are eyes are analogue), it works very well.</p>

<p>The discussion is just academical anyway. Color spaces are not perfect things, they just try to override imperfections in devices.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Let me repeat what some displays do: they let themselves be calibrated to a particular colorspace/profile and save that setting *directly* into the display - so the display acts like a true AdobeRGB device (or some other emulated device). </p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don’t believe that’s at all correct. The Adobe RGB (and all RGB working spaces) have very defined reference media (the ambient light around this theoretical space) and there’s simply no way, especially with a device yo claim is 113% of Adobe RGB (a spec itself that’s incorrect at least based just that spec) can produce Adobe RGB (1998) anymore than a device that’s 110% of sRGB can produce Adobe RGB (1998). </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>That means you don't need to specify a monitor profilE.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That’s ridiculous and incorrect. Without a display profile, all ICC aware applications can’t function correctly. In fact, in the absence of a good, ICC profile built of your display, the OS will make an assumption otherwise and use that generic profile for all previews. Until you understand Display Using Monitor Compensation in ICC aware application and the role of both display and document profile, you’ll never move forward in understanding the process. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The discussion is just academical anyway. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>No, it over because you asked a question based on incorrect assumptions and when corrected, keep ignoring the facts of the color science. So at this point, do whatever you wish to make your display or color management system appear to you to do what you wish. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Color spaces are not perfect things they just try to override imperfections in devices.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That’s a nonsensical statement. You’d be betters served by reading at the very least, the URL provided above. </p>

<p>Andrew, you still assume I don't understand the difference between the working color space and monitor profiles. Your assumption is based on my simplistic sounding question.</p>

<p>So again. My question was, what's actually included in the AdobeRGB1998.icc file? I didn't ask about color spaces, theoretical definitions in the white papers or differences between the color spaces for work and viewing. I really just want to know what specifications are included in THAT ONE FILE.</p>

<p>I'd check myself but there aren't any free icc file editors. I've read there is one for Linux, but it can't open that AdobeRGB1998.icc file because - get this - it's not according to spec! Does my question still sound so nonsenical?</p>

<p>Again, I understand the differences and the usual calibration workflow. The tech I speak about has nothing to do with usual monitors and their 'modes', although it sounds like it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Andrew, you still assume I don't understand the difference between the working color space and monitor profiles.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Did you read the article above? If so, I think you might want to retract that statement. <br>

I told you what’s in the Adobe RGB (1998) profile. It is both a working space and a color space. You’d best serve yourself and others here if instead of typing, you did a little reading first. I have plenty of other PDFs you can use to educate yourself but start at the beginning with the URL I posted above. </p>

<p>Well, tell me what's so wrong about my scenario:</p>

<p>There's a display with wider gamut than AdobeRGB. It can be calibrated so it shows the exact specs of AdobeRGB (excl. outside conditions, like lighting). That means, you can just use AdobeRGB1998.icc as the monitor profile (or none, if the app assumes the monitor profile is the same as the working space, like some do). The display handles the rest, incl. clipping the colors not contained in the AdobeRGB specs. And - again, it's calibrated.</p>

<p>What's so wrong with that? What would you with this? What profiles would you assign to the display? Would you have the need to calibrate with another tool just because it's more traditional, even if it gives the same results? Or what?</p>

<p>And yes, I've actually read your paper and didn't learn anything new. My problem is practical, not theoretical, while you still assume I'm an ignorant idiot.</p>

<p>BTW if you're curious why I use the ARGB mode of the display instead of its whole gamut, that's because it looks fugly and unnatural (reds too deep in comparison with other colors). So I just use the gamut clipped to ARGB, calibrate and use colormanaged apps.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That means, you can just use AdobeRGB1998.icc as the monitor profile (or none, if the app assumes the monitor profile is the same as the working space, like some do). </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That’s ridiculous and unnecessary. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>

 

 

<p>My problem is practical, not theoretical, while you still assume I'm an ignorant idiot.</p>

 

 

 

</p>

</blockquote>

Its hardly practical and the more you write, the more I tend to agree with your second statement above.

<blockquote></blockquote>

<p>Whatever. One thing I hate are "industry professionals" who can't comprehend simple questions outside their narrow scope, like it's obviously your case. See you in ten years when color aware devices are standard. For now, thanks for repeating obvious things I didn't ask 10 times over. Why couldn't you just spend ten seconds thinking about my questions instead of 10 minutes typing the same thing is beyond me, just don't spend anymore with either please.</p>

<p>If anyone else is willing to help with my question even if they aren't Adobe betatesters or whatever, or know how internals of Samsung displays work, I'll be glad.</p>

<p>Can someone please make up some rubbish to make Alex happy....</p>

<p>You really are a dick.</p>

<p>If there's a moderator on this forum, I'd like to have this topic removed please. It doesn't help anyone, especially not me, because of this smartass.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>You really are a dick.<br>

If there's a moderator on this forum, I'd like to have this topic removed please. It doesn't help anyone, especially not me, because of this smartass.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>You’ve got to be kidding! Yes, the moderator should ban you from the forums for such comments! </p>

<p>I apologize for the dick part, I'm an Eastern European and I lose temper easily. But seriously, if you can't reply to a question because the practice described is totally different than what you're used to, you should either try to interpret it correctly or just ignore it. Or, if you have useful information to add or correct, you can do just that instead of posting completely unrelated generic stuff nobody asked for.</p>

<p>My loss of temper is just because of my disappointment we can't communicate correctly. Either because of me not using the correct technical terms, or you not trying to understand some particular problem you're not aware of. Whatever.<br /> </p>

<p>Apology accepted. But I see no reason to go any further. </p>

<p>Your main issue stems from these statements: </p>

<blockquote>

<p>L20 offers the option to calibrate 4 profiles and save them directly into the display: one profile covers the whole gamut of the display (for massochists who love overly deep reds).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There’s nothing in terms of the differing color spaces that should warrant this comment. In fact, if you look at sRGB and Adobe RGB (1998), the big differences are the green chromaticity. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In emulation mode one can store any color space with a smaller gamut (say, of a printer or another display).</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Emulation on this and any other LCD display expect the HP Dream Color is not color managed (not calibrated and profiled). The entire idea behind this “mode” as I said above is to provide a somewhat less than ugly color appearance of images shown outside ICC aware applications on a wide gamut display. IOW, with proper color management and ICC aware applications, nothing should look ugly unless the RGB numbers really define an ugly color appearance. Outside such applications like most web browsers (aside from the recent release of Firefox and Safari), you can view pretty ugly appearing images because the browser assumes sRGB and your display is providing Adobe RGB (1998) or greater. The “emulation” mode is one that says “we don’t expect fully color management previews but lets not make them look butt-ugly”. </p>

<p>Again, before I leave this entire mess, there’s zero reason in ICC aware applications to do anything other than profile the display. It doesn’t have to be anything like Adobe RGB (1998) and probably is not for the reasons I’ve already defined. Outside ICC aware applications, just set the emulation to sRGB and hope for the best. Outside ICC aware applications, the previews are simply not accurate or correct. The degree they are incorrect can be accounted for somewhat by acting like a dumb sRGB device that has no clue about the display or document profile. You’re asking the application to send the RGB numbers directly to the display (don’t use, because you can’t use, Display Using Monitor Compensation). This is how Photoshop 4 and earlier and all non ICC aware applications behave. They have zero knowledge of the display or its profile, nor the document and its profile. It makes the viewing of content that’s not color management aware look less awful on a wide gamut display. That’s why the simulation exists. Your display simply cannot alter its native chromaticity! The HP can. No other system today provides this. </p>

<p>Or to put it another way, lets say I wave a magic wand and now all web and non ICC aware content is now assumed to be not sRGB but Adobe RGB (1998). This is something that may result years from now when virtually everyone is using a wide gamut display. If you view sRGB images on the web (or other non ICC aware applications), it will look real ugly. All Adobe RGB (1998) content while not being properly color managed will look OK. If such a scenario took place, you’d need to set your sRGB or super wide gamut display emulation to Adobe RGB (1998) otherwise everything would look wrong. All Adobe RGB (1998) content would look reasonably well. </p>

<p>You’ve got a display that says its 113% of Adobe RGB (1998) (mostly marketing speak but the point is, its a wide gamut display, not a so called “sRGB” gamut display). When you view stuff outside ICC aware applications that assume an sRGB behavior, it looks awful. You can’t calibrate to sRGB. Again, unless you’ve got a DreamColor, you’re just simulating, without a true ICC profile and Display Using Monitor Compensation, sRGB. Stuff looks less awful, but its not necessarily correct. You might be able to test this by setting your display for this simulation, opening an sRGB document and compare that to the same document in Photoshop or a similar ICC aware app. Problem is, in the simulation for sRGB, no profile is properly being used for Photoshop (you’d need two displays to see the two previews side by side) They should look much closer than the preview without the simulation but I bet you they don’t match exactly. </p>

<p>Bottom line. Calibrate and profile your display and work in ICC aware applications taking advantage of the wide gamut properties. If you have to view images outside of such applications and want the so called sRGB, no color management documents to look less poor, invoke the sRGB simulations. There’s zero reason you need to be messing around with the Adobe RGB (1998) profiles or mucking around with the display since whatever you do, the previews are not color managed. </p>

<p>Or get yourself a DreamColor. </p>

<p>Andrew, I completely understand what you're saying. But please read further.</p>

<p>As far as I know, my display does the same what you're describing when you talk about the DreamColor. Actually Samsung was the first to bring this stuff to mass market. I've reviewed one of their displays back in 2004 I think, which could do something similar. But that wasn't a wide-gamut display, only an expensive consumer display with fancy design and features.</p>

<p>When I speak about profiles stored in the monitor, I don't mean those warm/cold/movie/photos profiles found in most monitors. I speak about profiles which are calibrated to a specific color space (using a colorimeter, just like normal calibration) and stored in the monitor.</p>

<p>So, if I calibrate and store an ARGB profile, I don't need to specify a monitor profile in applications or OS. I can just use the ARGB ICC profile. The monitor handles the rest, including clipping colors outside of the specified ARGB gamut and using the stored profile to show a calibrated picture.</p>

<p>The display does the same as what an application or OS would do. As for the emulation mode, it should work like soft proofing - again, calibrated. It's ingenious.</p>

<p>Is it technically correct? I'm not sure, that's why I asked the original question. But it indeed seems to work that way - when I try to recalibrate the display using X-Rite software (using ARGB as reference), there's no difference.</p>

<p>Either way, this is the reason I wanted to know more about the internals of the AdobeRGB1998.icc file... Or the way Samsung XL20/30 actually work.</p>

<p>I hope you're still here and understand what I mean.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>As far as I know, my display does the same what you're describing when you talk about the DreamColor. Actually Samsung was the first to bring this stuff to mass market.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nope, it was NEC (see http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200602_neclcddisplay.pdf) at least in terms of a LED display. <br /> And no, the DreamColor is quite a different beast from the Samsung.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So, if I calibrate and store an ARGB profile, I don't need to specify a monitor profile in applications or OS.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It would be useful if you’d tell us why you think this is at all necessary or useful.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure, that's why I asked the original question.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think before anyone goes further, you have to figure that one out!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Either way, this is the reason I wanted to know more about the internals of the AdobeRGB1998.icc file</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You got that answer in my first post.</p>

<p>True, NEC was first with such a display. These Samsung units are basically the same thing, LED and all, with enhancements lying in the profiles. Samsung basically combined this technology with their multiple-profiles capabilities.</p>

<p>In your NEC review, you write: "The LCD2180WG-LED does have a hardware switch to set the display behavior to mimic sRGB, but using it invalidates the current calibration and the asso- ciated ICC profile. I would like to have the ability to calibrate and profile for this limited color gamut as well as Adobe RGB (1998), and be able to switch on-the-fly via software."</p>

<p>The Samsung does exactly that - calibrated profiles for other color spaces - the monitor's full gamut, ARGB, sRGB and emulation. It may not be the same as HP, I don't know the underlying technology, but Samsung made a big deal out of it back in the day, so perhaps it's something similar. I think it does change some characteristics in the hardware, perhaps different circuitry treats different profiles... I don't know, but it works very well, except of the weird problem which lead me to my original post.</p>

<p>"So, if I calibrate and store an ARGB profile, I don't need to specify a monitor profile in applications or OS." - I didn't phrase that in a fortunate manner. I meant the profile which is created for example when calibrating a display, including gamma curves and all. That information is now directly in the display for multiple profiles, and ARGB is used by the OS/apps as a reference point for displaying. The 'useful' part is, you don't need to switch profiles when switching the display built-in profiles. Does that make sense?</p>

<p>Since you have experience with the similar NEC unit, how would you treat this display? Considering you'd want to use the built-in profiles e.g. for soft proofing or for different lighting conditions?</p>

<p>So, Alex. Can I persuade you to talk about the monitor outside of the question about ICC profiles, etc. I nearly bought that monitor to replace my CRT. The LED back light and greatly enlarged gamut of possible color was intriguing.</p>

<p>How long have you had it? Has the monitor improved your ability to make an accurate print? Has the monitor improved your ability to edit your images? How is the monitor for other uses, such as general surfing of the Web, such as viewing sites like Photo.net?</p>

<p>Any information you can share on its use would be helpful. Thank you.</p>

<p>David Ralph</p>

<p>David,</p>

<p>I can't comment on printing much, since there aren't places around here which can do decent calibrated prints and provide a profile for everyone to download (unless it costs a real fortune). If you can make such prints, having a good wide-gamut display like this one surely helps.</p>

<p>For image editing it's excellent for the price it's currently available. I haven't directly compared it with other LCD displays, but it has replaced my old iiYama CRT. The gamut is crazy, that's why I keep it switched to ARGB or sRGB modes, the reds which can be displayed are too bloody. When I see it with my gf's laptop display side-by-side... The laptop looks like a 50-year old washed out black-and-white print in comparison. It can show darks and whites at once - the only values I can't recognize by sight are from 253,253,253 up. For everyone who considers this display size and price, it can surely replace any CRT. Very good for the eyes too, no blinking (even some cheap LCDs blink if you work with them for too long).</p>

<p>The internal calibration is extremely convenient. Now, when even web browsers are becoming color-management-aware, it's a nice thing to have such a display. I still need to find out how the emulation mode works. If you don't trust it (like Andrew here), you can always calibrate it by the usual means. Also, calibrator included.</p>

<p>I like the ability to use 'perfect' AdobeRGB and sRGB. Unlike some displays, which have some colors better behaved than the others, this actually looks natural, so I just use ARGB and switch to sRGB when I view unprofiled pictures. You won't want to go back.</p>

<p>I've had this monitor for a year and after a short while, I bought another one for my other place too (and was a verge to getting a third one for a dual-display environment).</p>

<p>A nice review is here, where the display's performance closely matches those with 3x the price: http://www.trustedreviews.com/monitors/review/2007/09/07/Samsung-SyncMaster-XL20/p1. Bottom line - for the current price, go for it!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I would like to have the ability to calibrate and profile for this limited color gamut as well as Adobe RGB (1998), and be able to switch on-the-fly via software.</p>

<p>So, if I calibrate and store an ARGB profile, I don't need to specify a monitor profile in applications or OS.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why? What possible benefit would this produce and, since the system <strong>always</strong> uses some profile for previews in ICC aware applications, what possible benefit would there by to attempting to trick it (meaning now, all ICC aware applications could be wrong, just as if you calibrated and profiled the display, then trashed that profile and introduced on that isn’t describing the display conditions). </p>

<p>ICC aware applications always reach for some display profile. There’s no, no color management by not having a display profile option. You can’t turn Display Using Monitor Compensation off, certainly in Photoshop. <br>

In the case of the NEC LED, when you use the sRGB simulation, its not producing correct previews since the system is still looking at the original profile. But the idea is you’re using this outside ICC aware applications because the wide gamut profile description and display conditions make sRGB like images look ugly. So the simulation is a less bad preview but incorrect. If you’re browsing the web (in a dumb non ICC aware browser), its not ugly but its still not correct compared to viewing in an ICC aware browser with an sRGB like display, an Adobe RGB like display or a 113% of Adobe RGB like display. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Since you have experience with the similar NEC unit, how would you treat this display?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I told you above. I follow my own advise. I calibrate the display to target aim points based on the print viewing booth next to the display and I move on. My web browsers are both ICC aware. If I want an sRGB behaving display. I hook one up (actually I have a dual display system, the other is a NEC 2490). </p>

<p>Andrew, I keep telling you the same thing over and over again!</p>

<p>Just look how my Windows is set up.</p>

<p>This display is a color management aware DEVICE, so it will convert the incoming image information to display the correct colors! <strong>The calibrated color profile is stored in the display, not externally</strong> . And it will do that with both sRGB and AdobeRGB - both calibrated! It's not the same as the NEC!</p>

<p>The point of this is, the display can provide <strong>multiple independently calibrated profiles</strong> , while the <strong>OS and color aware application still use only one (AdobeRGB1998.icc) for display reference</strong> . The display will convert the color information by itself.</p>

<p>"If I want an sRGB behaving display. I hook one up." With this display, you have both calibrated displays in one unit. That's the whole point of this system.</p><div></div>