“Widening the color gamut is often marketed as an unconditional improvement, when in reality there are downsides like increased metamerism that need to be considered. More education is needed so consumers understand this.”
“For professional use cases like color-critical work, metamerism is a major concern. Displays optimized for wide gamuts may not be suitable. Selecting displays that prioritize color accuracy over wide gamuts could be preferable. However, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. The needs of casual viewers watching movies may be different from graphic designers collaborating on a project. Each use case needs to weigh the pros and cons of wide gamuts based on their specific requirements.”
“But, putting aside all of the inherent inconsistencies in what constitutes color in displays, wider color gamuts get displays closer to rendering real-world colors, and that seems to be biggest selling point of their pursuit. That and the fact that it sounds great on a marketing sheet. Yet, wider color gamuts are also, inherently, designed to allow for the likelihood that content produced in HDR or to DCI-P3 standards for cinema can be enabled on displays.”
“Ironically, even in the cinema, movie theaters use various types of projectors – Xenon lamps, LED, lasers etc. Each has their own spectral power distribution. If a movie is color graded for one type of projector, the colors may not match well when shown using a projector with a different spectrum. So, common standard illuminants used in production may not match the theater’s projection system, increasing metameric issues. Theaters also have relatively uncontrolled lighting conditions – ambient light spectra can differ across seats/screens and viewers have different individual color vision and perception, leading to increased observer metamerism. And who doesn’t like those new reclining loungers in movie theaters? Good, but a change in seating angle relative to the screen shifts the colors seen due to properties of the projection surface.”
oh damn!