Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
I don't know how HCFR has calculated this value, but these are the absolute numbers that can be compeard.Actually it's +46% compared to the luminance of sRGB blue.
Spectrum* and human cone sensitivity are independet from that coherence which just reflects relationships of the additive color mixture (see the matrix calculation).But yes, it does need to be higher luminance to account for our sensitivity to the longer wavelength
As I said, this chromaticity chart doesn't reflect the situation accurately. I have just taken the data out of the 2 profiles itself (and adapted them to D65 to have the same reference white for all values). Have a look at the presentation in Lab XoR has posted (you reposted it above the validation chart). The white volume is the sRGB gamut boundary there, the colored solid volume the display gamut boundary. As the display behaves linear enough (see profile validation chart), the changes through the "forced" normalisation of the colorimetric values during profilation are minor.Compared with the chart on their review page, it's not the same blue:
Best regards
Denis
*
As a precaution, not directly related: All spectral information is lost in the colorimetric values - it is never the aim, possible or necessary to reach a specific spectrum (for example similair to D65).
Last edited: