Most notebook displays are not even 8-bit native (the IPS panel in the Retina MacBook Pro is, however) and you need greater than 8-bit precision when going beyond the sRGB gamut, or the individual steps (gradation) start to become too separated, and banding is introduced into the image. In fact, exceeding the sRGB gamut can be detrimental to image quality. At best, other browsers such as Safari support colour management on tagged images only.Įxceeding the sRGB gamut is only beneficial when editing RAW images from DSLRs, or doing print work. And if you are not using Firefox with gfx.color_management.mode set to 1, you are not even seeing colour accurately on the web≿irefox is the only browser to currently support full colour management. Which frankly makes me feel display-spoiled.įor what it is worth, this has virtually no impact for most consumers.Īll video content is mastered to BT.709, and all web content is mastered to sRGB, both of which have the same gamutsignificantly lower than Adobe RGB. Until then, it will feel lacking after seeing this. I will do the write-up in a little while spoiler: I really hope Apple increases the color gamut to at least match this on next year's Retina Display, then you couldn't do much better. ![]() It should be similar to a RMBP vs AUO 95% comparison since the iPad was measured to cover about 67% of the AdobeRGB gamut as well. I did do an extensive comparison with my iPad Retina Display and there are big differences between the two. Let's show Apple these displays so they can each 100% AdobeRGB next time round. Nonetheless, it would have been an even more glaring title if I had compared the 67% Retina AdobeGB vs 98% on the AUO panel.īy effect, the bigger color gamut saturates colors to the point of being noticeably more vivid (they pop quite a bit more) without looking unnatural. I only mentioned NTSC since display manufacturers still use this in their specification datasheet. So the Retina MacBook Pro display is not the end-all king of laptop displays in one significant way, although it keeps its crown otherwise. The ability to display 23% more colors really makes a noticeable difference compared to a standard 72% NTSC color gamut display, though the Retina MacBook Pro has a very non-standard 72% display so it could be a fair trade. Too bad I won't be able to purchase the RMBP until I sell this otherwise I would be doing a side-by-side comparison. Although I will take another look at the Retina MacBook Pro tomorrow and write-up a comparison. ![]() ![]() Ironically, one of the main reasons I may keep my 95% color gamut Clevo would be for the display. The trade-off is sharper text for more blocky, slightly less vivid images. ![]() It seems odd to worry as the MacBook Pro Retina is still the king of displays with its resolution, though colors really do pop off the screen with the 95% color gamut display - and I suspect web-site images will look better thanks to the 1200p resolution not exposing the pixilation. While this is a non-issue to most people, especially as they won't be comparing displays and the MacBook Pro's resolution punch makes up for it, somebody like me who purchased a Clevo laptop with a 95% NTSC color gamut display has to wonder how much I'll miss it if I sell it for the Retina MacBook pro. What does the color gamut "deficiency" (though it's not that bad to be called that.) mean? The Retina MacBook Pro can't show colors as true-to-life and vividly as some of the best PC displays.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |