This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
"This means that potential color accuracy is wasted for reserving these unnecessary colors."
Someone please explain to me what this means.
Certainly file space can be wasted by storing unnecessary data. And I can imagine that color accuracy might be compromised if colors are allowed to stray into the no man's land of imaginary color space.
But, how exactly can color accuracy be "wasted"? Am I missing something?
(Objection cross-posted at Talk:ProPhoto RGB color space)
70.236.225.228 17:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Some unregistered Wikipedian wrote at Talk:Violet (color) that 0, 0, 255 in this space is violet, not blue. Anyone able to explain in detail?? Georgia guy 15:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Page moved. Ucucha 19:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Adobe Wide Gamut RGB color space →
Wide Gamut RGB color space — Adobe itself as well as other companies (Canon, Nikon, etc.) call it “Wide Gamut RGB”
• I can see one potential objection: this name does sound kind of generic.
Skarebo (
talk)
10:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.I've been looking around for the original source for these numbers and haven't been able to find one -- a lot of pages I've seen just directly cite this page directly, rather than the original source. I've been looking for a source for the original spec, but haven't found one.
The page itself isn't clear if these come from one of the cited sources or not, and I think that the table should be properly cited.
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
"This means that potential color accuracy is wasted for reserving these unnecessary colors."
Someone please explain to me what this means.
Certainly file space can be wasted by storing unnecessary data. And I can imagine that color accuracy might be compromised if colors are allowed to stray into the no man's land of imaginary color space.
But, how exactly can color accuracy be "wasted"? Am I missing something?
(Objection cross-posted at Talk:ProPhoto RGB color space)
70.236.225.228 17:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Some unregistered Wikipedian wrote at Talk:Violet (color) that 0, 0, 255 in this space is violet, not blue. Anyone able to explain in detail?? Georgia guy 15:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Page moved. Ucucha 19:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Adobe Wide Gamut RGB color space →
Wide Gamut RGB color space — Adobe itself as well as other companies (Canon, Nikon, etc.) call it “Wide Gamut RGB”
• I can see one potential objection: this name does sound kind of generic.
Skarebo (
talk)
10:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.I've been looking around for the original source for these numbers and haven't been able to find one -- a lot of pages I've seen just directly cite this page directly, rather than the original source. I've been looking for a source for the original spec, but haven't found one.
The page itself isn't clear if these come from one of the cited sources or not, and I think that the table should be properly cited.