My ... well, you chose to apply an interesting, and I guess, emotional interpretation to my comments. Understand, those assumptions are your own and have nothing to do with me or my written comments. I deal in Reality. What is X? Why and how and when does it work? What's the data behind that? What is it useful for? And when does it break? (Remember, everything breaks at some point.)
Computers and operating systems and software are just tools. Period. Getting caught up in them is to me absurd.
So in your opinion, Adobe " ... screwed up colors on ALL modern Macs" ... and it is one of their biggest gaffes? You are perhaps not aware that P3 screens comprise what ... something around 2-4% of total screens in use? Anyway, a pretty small number overall. Hmm. And also that Apple went way off from every other screen on the planet in their design for this? And you blame Adobe that Apple's design and apps don't play well with everything else on the planet? Right.
Let's actually look at the reality.
There has been a color standard for video material ... for nearly all video material ... for many years now. It is STILL the primary standard that over 85% of pro-colorist material is delivered for. The only broadcast use in the world not done in video sRGB/Rec.709/gamma-2.4/100nits production requirements for acceptance is done in HDR.
Premiere is built to follow that standard. And that says nothing good or ill about it ... it is just what it is. A standard so material produced and distributed has at least a flipping chance of being seen somewhat sort of close to "intended" across the widest number of screens possible.
There is no place on the planet where the Apple P3-Display is accepted as a pro video standard for broadcast/satellite.
As to the Mac's pretty and intriguing new display ... that is a very unique "space" they constructed, and let's look at it.
What's P3 color space been used for? There are two versions for theatrical release specifications ... P3-DCI (Theatre) and P3-D60 Cinema (ACES). They use the same color primaries but with slightly different white points ... DCI is D63 (approximately) and D60 (Cinema) is D60. Both use a gamma of 2.6, with the deepened shadows that work best in a dark/near-black environment for display, as in modern movie theaters.
Apple took the 20-25% wider color gamut of the P3 color space, which is actually pretty cool. I think it would be nice for most everything to move to that base color space/gamut over time as well, as more screens become capable of displaying much of that color space. The majority of both computer screens and TV's out there cannot at this time, but over time, that will improve. (A relatively small percentage of screens worldwide actually can display P3 at the current time however.)
Remember, Apple's US market share is just under 13%, and worldwide is a bit under 7%. The Retina (P3) screens are about 1/3 of current Apple screens out there from what I've seen published. So ... again ... P3 screens comprise what ... something around 2-5% of total screens in use, depending on the country? Anyway, a very small number overall.
Past taking the P3 color space, the Apple 'designers' changed everything else. First, in what seems a wise choice, they stayed with the D65 white point of nearly all current monitors and screens outside of a couple Asian countries where they use a white point of around D90.
But ... for gamma ... they went very Apple. Unique, shall we say.
Their stats only say "sRGB" for gamma, but what they don't say is that they do NOT use the sRGB full gamma function for screens, but only the sRGB camera gamma function.
This is wildly different than all other screens both computer and TV on the planet. sRGB on all those screens means applying both the camera AND screen gamma functions, ending up with a screen setting between 2.2 and 2.4.
The Apple screens however are essentially a "scene-referred" gamma of 1.96.
Had they kept BOTH the white point and base gamma of all other screens, the only issue would be that Rec.709 produced material displayed on a P3-Display screen would be a bit over-saturated perceptually unless the display device auto-corrected for being a Rec.709 image.
But going well off from anything else, and without any apps or OS situations to naturally correct for space/gamut/gamma mismatches, it makes life for the rest of us somewhat more difficult. And you blame "Adobe" for ... that?
Material produced to Rec.709 standards and simply "plopped" onto a P3 Display screen will have both exaggerated colors and heavily lifted shadows compared to that material viewed on a correct Rec.709 screen. As there is no brightness standard for Apple's P3-Display, that can be another complicating factor. If the screen is down close to the 100 nits of Rec.709 in a moderately lit to moderately darkened room, you will probably get over-exaggerated colors and lifted shadows.
But if the P3 screen is say 200 nits or better, you get such incredibly lifted "milky" shadows and tonal range stretched out over a wider dynamic range so that the colors can appear somewhat muted.
Material produced with a P3-Display screen and Premiere typically results in an export that is much darker on the same P3 screen outside of Premiere. Well ... yea, as there was a massive gamma mis-communication there.
Using the "Enable Display Color Management" option in the Premiere Preferences dialog for those with P3-Display screens means that Premiere will attempt to read the ICC profile set in the OS and mod it's internal monitors so that they can come close to giving a perceptual match to an actual Rec.709 screen. How well it functions is of course going to be driven by the specifics of the individual gear and setup, and not predictable of course. Must be tested.
This would hopefully allow someone working with a P3-Display screen to produce material somewhat close to "correct" for the vast majority of current screens. And "close to correct" is really good enough if blogging/web use is everything one produces. So a Mac user with a P3-Display screen using the "EDCM" option should be able to produce for the web and have their stuff looking somewhat sorta similar. And as colorists with highly-managed setups can't really beat that for web use, well ... yea, it's good enough.
And if you need to have this look best on that 2-3% of P3-Display screens out there, then use the LUT that color engineer Francis Crossman makes available on their post on this forum about that issue. Use it in the Export dialog's LUT slot, and it will take Rec.709 material and mod the file so that it will appear at least close to "correct" on a P3-Display screen.
It will of course not be appropriate for any 'standard' video/TV screen. So in making your material better for 2-4% of screens, you're also choosing to be less accurate on 96-98% of screens. And that isn't because of ANY decision by Adobe, it's because of decisions by Apple. And the fact that neither their OS nor any apps I've heard of auto-adjust playback on P3-Display screens for non-P3 material. Apparently, some players can be set to act appropriately depending on the material they are playing, but it takes user action to do so.
And it's your choice of course. Learn how the stuff actually works, and make decisions that work for your needs.
The OS, the software ... they're just tools. Lose the emotions in dealing with them. They're another form of hammer is all they are. Use the right "hammer" for what you do, but ... you also have to learn to how to properly use a hammer first. To make it do all sorts of things and trick for you.
Knowledge of tools is simply part of the craft of producing.
Neil
11
Replies
AdChoices