Steve the Pocket wrote:I think the problem with embedded color profiles is that what they're designed to do and what they actually do are two completely different things. Their purpose is to override the limitations of the monitor. But they don't. In fact, most of the time they do the exact opposite. If I've adjusted my monitor so the desktop wallpaper and icons and other UI elements look right, images with embedded profiles are almost invariably going to look wrong, and vice versa
That's because your operating system has a shitty color management implementation. In a world where color profiles work as intended, your wallpaper and icons and other UI elements will all have been color managed as well, so EVERYTHING is transformed from the space they were authored in to your monitor space. If you prefer, you can just define "monitor space" as sRGB (this is the default anyway) then make your adjustments on top of that. Not only do you still get your adjustments, but they are now CONSISTENT because all items have been converted to the same starting space.
I'm sure in artists' wildest fantasies, I'd be able to open up a window with an sRGB-encoded PNG inside, and fiddle with the settings on my monitor to my heart's content—brightness, contrast, color balance, whatever—and everything behind the window will change but the contents of the window will not. Same with enabling things like f.Lux or Night Mode. But the world doesn't work that way, and I'm pretty sure it shouldn't, for the same reason that I don't want the paint on my walls to magically stay the exact same color and brightness regardless of whether I have the lights on or not.
No, f.lux is SUPPOSED to override the profile! You get everything consistently in sRGB, then skew the white point on top of that. That's the entire point! You are not supposed to have non-managed items to being with! This is where almost all the complaints about color management come from: people trying to find workarounds for software that implements it badly or not at all, then they get angry when their workarounds fail with software that does it correctly. I understand that's annoying sometimes, but ignoring color management is not going to ever solve this.
In fact, as HDR and wider color spaces such as DCI P3 get more mainstream, this is going to get a lot worse. Up until now, most monitors (aside from some high-end content creation displays) were ostensibly trying to be sRGB displays, and almost all desktop content as authored to be viewed on an sRGB display. Once you're in HDR-land, neither of those assumptions holds anymore. You're never going to get consistent color saturation if you have a mix of P3 and sRGB elements going into your screen and are making zero effort to try make them all consistent before pushing them to the display.
billyswong wrote:It has always been this "meaningless" in reality. Owner of the monitor/computer decide how red a "full red / #ff0000" is his/her monitor. If one's screen set the maximum brightness to be below the range of your color profile embed in file, A sane person will expect a light gray in your file to be displayed dimmer than his maximum white, not the other way around nor a forced plateau until a not-so-light gray.
Stop refusing to face the difference of painting/printing and screen/monitor. (In the case of projector, "full black / #000000" is often just a dark gray since most room don't go totally dark when using the projector. The projector manufacturer can't even embed a meaningful color-profile in their product to satisfy you guys' wants.)
I will even rather say .png files supporting color profile embed is a flaw, as it give artists false hope that they can exercise their control-freak madness. HTML, if you really want to insist one, say they use sRGB color space in the spec, but almost all non-artists rationally expect if they tune their screen to be more color-saturated than sRGB, a webpage will look more color-saturated than sRGB.
Ok, great. So you've adjusted your monitor so full green (let's use float colors for the sake of clarity here, and say G=1.0) is a shade of green you enjoy. Now, you have two images of a green forest, one in sRGB and one in ProPhoto. Which should give your chosen green? If you just pick one particular space, chances are you'll perceive the saturation as being fucked up on the other one. The only way to make it so both give your chosen green is to tag what space they were in, convert them to the space you were looking at when you chose that "favorite green" and THEN feed them to your monitor. If you like being accurate to what the content creator intended, you can calibrate so "chosen green" actually is sRGB green. If you like some other green, you can add that on top of the profile (as noted in my other reply, the easiest way to do that is usually to set the monitor space as being sRGB in software, then adjust green within the monitor OSD settings)