I am not convinced Tim, too many varriables. Similar is the new HDR in lightroom. You need a monitor to display HDR and can the printer resolve what you think you see on screen.Eh!
Thank you for the video. What I will never understand in such discussions: If a monitor like yours and my Eizo 279X can't display the DXO gamut, what good is it? Isn't that rather flying blind?
It's called "Color Management." If things were simple and straightforward as many (including yourself) are under the impression, there would be no need of the term "color management." It is understood that computers, including the ones inside our cameras, can make sense of and "see" colors that are not able to be represented on a screen, or, for that matter, on a print. But! WHY, WHY, WHY throw that color away!? It isn't necessary to throw that information away, and not a good idea. Monitors may be able in the future to display more colors, and prints contain more colors. If the color information is cut off or reduced for the sake of "well, I can't see it now", that doesn't mean it may not be able to be seen later. But, it's even important in the here and now. There are printer/paper combinations that CAN go outside of the sRGB space (and I believe even in some instances and areas, even Adobe RGB). When color management is set up properly, what it means is that we get a good representation on screen of what colors our images contain (though of course not perfectly faithful), because the color management system interprets the "real" colors of the image into what it knows are the limits the monitor can show (via a monitor profile), and when output to a printer with a proper profile for the printer/paper combination, it does the same.
Hmm... Two things. I'm hearing two admissions. One by Fotospeed and one by DXO. The admission is the same, "We don't really know what's going on." DXO is touting a "new" advancement that is an admission that their previous software apparently wasn't up to par. OF COURSE their working space should be very wide gamut! Are you kidding me!? It's a RAW converter, it HAS to be. It doesn't matter if the monitor is sRGB or sub-sRGB. The fundamental job of the software is to not throw away any color detail from the RAW as it converts to the working, and then to an output color space! Its job also is to represent those colors, whether out of gamut of the monitor or not, as faithfully as possible on screen! It is shocking to see DXO tout an "advancement" that, if it really is better than what they previously did-at least in any meaningful way-belies the fact that their previous way was apt to improperly handle color conversion. And, doesn't Fotospeed create color profiles for printing??? If so, how can you possibly not understand the process? I'm hoping that you really do and were just trying not to get too much into the weeds on this, but everything you said was wishy-washy and makes it sound like you truly don't understand color management/profiling.
