Where I keep my spare cats.

On Sun, 02 Jul 2017 18:47:55 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jul 2, 2017, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 02 Jul 2017 19:19:11 -0400,
wrote:

In , Eric Stevens
wrote:

for instance, the retina imac 5k costs about the same as a dell 5k
display, which is just a display, no computer. you have to add the
cost of the computer, which makes it quite a bit more expensive
than the imac.

You aren't making a fair comparison, here.

oh yes i am.

If the Dell 5K is anything like the the two 25" UP2516D screens that I
have just bought there is an awful lot of memory and computing power
inside to deal with multiple color spaces etc. It's not just a bare
display. I have no idea of how the Apple 5K compares in this respect
or how it handles the equivalent problems.

whatever is needed is part of the imac itself.

That's right, so how nay color spaces does it recognise and how are
they calibrated?


as many as you want (within the limits of the panel) and with a
hardware puck.

So within the limits of the panel, how many color spaces does it
recognise and how are they calibrated?

a panel does not recognize colour spaces nor is there a number. it's
just a component out of many.

So there are no preset color spaces. So how then do you go about
configuring the 5k if you want it to display the (say) AdobeRGB color
space?

anything smaller than the physical limit of the panel can be fully
rendered and anything larger will either be clipped or shrunk down,
depending on the user's choice.

your mistake is assuming dell is a reference of some sort. it's not.

Most cars have 4 wheels. So if a new model of car comes out it is
reasonably safe to assume they have 4 wheels.

I quote it because I know it and it's general technology is typical of
other screens that use an internal LUT for screen profiling.

dell makes run of the mill stuff. nothing they do is cutting edge.

Nothing to do with whether it is cutting edge or not. Screens with
built in LUT color management need memory and processors upon which to
run the LUT software. The logical functions of all the relevant
screens are much the same. I just happen to have Dell screens so I
used my particular knowlege of them as reference point to ask you
questions about the Apple 5k. And it was you, in
Message-ID: who raised the
matter of Dell.

Further,
as you say, it is made by LG as is the Apple 5k display.

the first retina imac was, but i don't know about the current one, nor
does it matter. do you know who fabbed the processor in your microwave
oven? would knowing that make your food taste better? no and no.

what matters is that the current retina 5k display is a dci-p3 wide
gamut retina display that's simply spectacular.

And if you want to run AdobeRGB, how do you go about selecting that
color spand how do you go about calibrating the 5k to that color
space?

With a Mac you simply go to the OS System preferences, select “Displays”
and select whichever display profile you want, AdobeRGB, RGB Wide Gamut,
ProPhotoRGB, or calibration profile from whichever calibration tool you use.
This can be used for the built-in iMac 4K and 5K displays, or any additional
second displays for Mac Mini, or Mac Pro.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lvhrnp8r0bmb0qv/screenshot_73.png

I understand all that but until very recently these were all
bog-standard 8/24 bit ICC color profiles.

My first question is "is the Apple 5k utilizing and 8 bit, 10 bit or
what image stream?" From the blurb for the forthcoming 5k iMac I
suspect it is using a 10 bit image stream. Very likely that also
applies to the current 5ks and those of the recent past. So what
happens with the 8 bit graphics disgorged by the software in the
computer? My guess is that it is massaged by some kind of lookup table
(LUT).

The answer to whether or not it utilises preset color spaces is that
it has sRGB, Adobe and DCI-P3 preinstalled. So somewhere there is a
mechanism for converting the standard screen output data stream to the
data stream required by the 5k. And all of this has to be capable of
calibration.

My observation is that both Spyder and I1 plant ICC or ICM profiles in
the appropriate directory of the operating system. External monitors
with their own internal LUT require special software software to write
new LUTs to the monitor. The Apple 5k is slightly different in that
all its firmware is incorporated into the computer. But if it is to
enable ICC or ICM color spaces to be calibrated it must convert them
to 10 bit data. Most monitors employing a LUT require the I1 to work
in conjunction the software required to load updated LUT data. X-Rite
does not appear to sell a special version of their software to enable
a 5k iMac to be calibrated. I presume therefore that the 5k employs 8
bit ICC profiles with no LUT.

All of this is not much better than guesswork and I am open to
correction if anybody knows the actual situation.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

My first question is "is the Apple 5k utilizing and 8 bit, 10 bit or
what image stream?"

quartz supports 16 bpc, or 64 bpp.

From the blurb for the forthcoming 5k iMac I
suspect it is using a 10 bit image stream. Very likely that also
applies to the current 5ks and those of the recent past. So what
happens with the 8 bit graphics disgorged by the software in the
computer? My guess is that it is massaged by some kind of lookup table
(LUT).

what matters is accuracy, not whether it uses a lut or not.

The answer to whether or not it utilises preset color spaces is that
it has sRGB, Adobe and DCI-P3 preinstalled. So somewhere there is a
mechanism for converting the standard screen output data stream to the
data stream required by the 5k. And all of this has to be capable of
calibration.

mac os handles any colour space conversions that are needed.

more than you ever wanted to know:
https://developer.apple.com/library/...313/_index.htm
l

tl;dr
https://developer.apple.com/library/...313/Art/tn2313
_whathappensinappall.jpg

On Jul 2, 2017, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 02 Jul 2017 18:47:55 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jul 2, 2017, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 02 Jul 2017 19:19:11 -0400,
wrote:

In , Eric Stevens
wrote:

for instance, the retina imac 5k costs about the same as a dell 5k
display, which is just a display, no computer. you have to add the
cost of the computer, which makes it quite a bit more expensive
than the imac.

You aren't making a fair comparison, here.

oh yes i am.

If the Dell 5K is anything like the the two 25" UP2516D screens that
I
have just bought there is an awful lot of memory and computing power
inside to deal with multiple color spaces etc. It's not just a bare
display. I have no idea of how the Apple 5K compares in this respect
or how it handles the equivalent problems.

whatever is needed is part of the imac itself.

That's right, so how nay color spaces does it recognise and how are
they calibrated?


as many as you want (within the limits of the panel) and with a
hardware puck.

So within the limits of the panel, how many color spaces does it
recognise and how are they calibrated?

a panel does not recognize colour spaces nor is there a number. it's
just a component out of many.

So there are no preset color spaces. So how then do you go about
configuring the 5k if you want it to display the (say) AdobeRGB color
space?

anything smaller than the physical limit of the panel can be fully
rendered and anything larger will either be clipped or shrunk down,
depending on the user's choice.

your mistake is assuming dell is a reference of some sort. it's not.

Most cars have 4 wheels. So if a new model of car comes out it is
reasonably safe to assume they have 4 wheels.

I quote it because I know it and it's general technology is typical of
other screens that use an internal LUT for screen profiling.

dell makes run of the mill stuff. nothing they do is cutting edge.

Nothing to do with whether it is cutting edge or not. Screens with
built in LUT color management need memory and processors upon which to
run the LUT software. The logical functions of all the relevant
screens are much the same. I just happen to have Dell screens so I
used my particular knowlege of them as reference point to ask you
questions about the Apple 5k. And it was you, in
Message-ID: who raised the
matter of Dell.

Further,
as you say, it is made by LG as is the Apple 5k display.

the first retina imac was, but i don't know about the current one, nor
does it matter. do you know who fabbed the processor in your microwave
oven? would knowing that make your food taste better? no and no.

what matters is that the current retina 5k display is a dci-p3 wide
gamut retina display that's simply spectacular.

And if you want to run AdobeRGB, how do you go about selecting that
color spand how do you go about calibrating the 5k to that color
space?

With a Mac you simply go to the OS System preferences, select “Displays�
and select whichever display profile you want, AdobeRGB, RGB Wide Gamut,
ProPhotoRGB, or calibration profile from whichever calibration tool you use.
This can be used for the built-in iMac 4K and 5K displays, or any additional
second displays for Mac Mini, or Mac Pro.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lvhrnp8r0bmb0qv/screenshot_73.png

I understand all that but until very recently these were all
bog-standard 8/24 bit ICC color profiles.

Well, you asked how one went about things, so I explained. Now you are saying
you knew that all along.
Anyway, I am sure things are going to be changing soon, very soon.

My first question is "is the Apple 5k utilizing and 8 bit, 10 bit or
what image stream?" From the blurb for the forthcoming 5k iMac I
suspect it is using a 10 bit image stream. Very likely that also
applies to the current 5ks and those of the recent past. So what
happens with the 8 bit graphics disgorged by the software in the
computer? My guess is that it is massaged by some kind of lookup table
(LUT).

When I get my 5K iMac I will let you know.

The answer to whether or not it utilises preset color spaces is that
it has sRGB, Adobe and DCI-P3 preinstalled. So somewhere there is a
mechanism for converting the standard screen output data stream to the
data stream required by the 5k.

Yes.

And all of this has to be capable of calibration.

....and yes.

My observation is that both Spyder and I1 plant ICC or ICM profiles in
the appropriate directory of the operating system.

That is the idea, and the same thing is done for Macs.

External monitors with their own internal LUT require special software software to write
new LUTs to the monitor. The Apple 5k is slightly different in that all its firmware is incorporated into the computer.

The MacOS system preferences for displays gives you the option for using
external, or mirrored displays. Calibration profiles are applied
individually.

But if it is to enable ICC or ICM color spaces to be calibrated it must convert them to 10 bit data. Most monitors employing a LUT require the I1 to work
in conjunction the software required to load updated LUT data. X-Rite does not appear to sell a special version of their software to enable a 5k iMac to be
calibrated. I presume therefore that the 5k employs 8 bit ICC profiles with
no LUT.

I wouldn’t be too presumptuous, the MacOS world is going to change
radically in a few months.

I am sure that X-Rite/Pantone will have software to enable iMac 5K
calibration. I don’t currently have a 5K iMac, but I should have one within
a few months. My current display is calibrated using X-Rite software, my
printing is done using custom paper/printer icc profiles.

All of this is not much better than guesswork and I am open to
correction if anybody knows the actual situation.

No, you were correct in the paragraph above. You are being a tad
presumptuous. The whole issue of 5K calibration and appropriate icc profiles
has yet to fully mature, for MacOS and all others.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:


External monitors with their own internal LUT require special software
software to write
new LUTs to the monitor. The Apple 5k is slightly different in that all its
firmware is incorporated into the computer.

The MacOS system preferences for displays gives you the option for using
external, or mirrored displays. Calibration profiles are applied
individually.

something windows still doesn't do properly.

On 02-Jul-17 2:49 AM, nospam wrote:
In article
XnsA783B1E3E49FHT1@z2EEd70JefktzJb64TMQebUU311gP5 hrG.npCmT206Xn5lh.90b6
e2Gl51, Diesel wrote:

you don't understand what it is you're reading, mostly because you
don't use macs and don't understand how they work, and based on
your posts, you are an apple-hating troll.

Partially correct. I don't like macs, would prefer not to use macs,
but, I'm not an Apple hating troll, and, I do understand how they
work.

based on what you've written, you haven't any clue whatsoever about how
macs work (or anything else apple makes). everything you've said is
nothing more than ignorant apple-bashing trolling.

In the event you missed them, I've included some below:

https://arstechnica.com/security/201...vered-mac-malw
are-may-have- circulated-in-the-wild-for-2-years/

Apple issues MacOS update that automatically protects infected
machines.

already patched. non-issue.

The article is from January, and, you claimed Macs didn't have
malware in the wild. The article disputes that statement.

it's been patched so it no longer applies, and it also required user
installation anyway.

in the wild means propagates on its own. there is no mac malware that
propagates on its own. period.

meanwhile, wannacry and petya are currently pwning millions of windows
systems worldwide.

not a single mac has been affected.

nothing is 100% secure, but macs are definitely well above windows.



Android is beating the snot out of the ios...

nope.

http://bgr.com/2017/01/12/iphone-vs-...q4-2016-us-uk/
In the United States, Apple¹s iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus and iPhone 6s
were three best-selling smartphones during the three-month period
ended in November. According to Kantar, the three devices combined to
account for 31.3% of all smartphone sales in the US. Samsung¹s Galaxy
S7 and Galaxy S7 edge took the numbers four and five spots, combining
to account for 28.9% of all smartphone sales in the region.

Apple¹s share of the US smartphone market climbed 6.4% on-year to
43.5% in the three months ended in November, while Android slipped
5.1% to 55.3%.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2016/...ne-grabs-big-m
arket-share-in-the-us.aspx
Based on Kantar's data, the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus seem to have
hit the ground running. iPhone sales represented 40.5% of smartphone
sales in the three months ending October -- up a notable seven
percentage points year over year, from 33.5%.


most android devices are cheap phones, often just feature phones which
doesn't even have the google play store, which means it's barely even
an android phone. there's no way to add new apps. comparing feature
phones to flagship phones such as the iphone and the samsung galaxy
series is bogus.



I'm not a big fan of Chrome books
myself, because of their limited
functionality as compared to a real PC,

chromebooks in no way have limited functionality. what they do is
optimized for different use cases, and they do it *better* than trying
to hack a windows pc into doing the same tasks.

but, I'd much rather see them in more
educational areas than I would
the Apples anyday.

only because you're ignorant and hate everything apple.

pick the best tool for the job. sometimes it's apple and sometimes it's
not.

intentionally avoiding a product because of who makes it, particularly
when it's the best choice, is *stupid*.


Some schools are investing in the chromebooks, aka, wannabe
laptops.

chromebooks aren't wannabe laptops. some of them are more
expensive than a windows laptop.

Chromebooks are most certainly wannabe laptops.

nonsense.

Cost doesn't mean
everything, either.

it does to you, because you keep yapping about prices.

what matters is the best tool for a given task and how productive a
person is when using it.

One can purchase a really cheap, LOW END windows
laptop for less than some Chromebooks, sure.

one can purchase cheap low end crap for all sorts of things. they are
generally utter junk.



linux is great for servers. buy a bunch of asus boxes and set up a
server rack. nothing wrong with that.

Linux certainly shines in the server world. As well as embedded
devices, routers, etc things that allow us to communicate. it's also
gaining ground on the desktop.

no it isn't. linux desktop share is dropping, less than 2% as of right
now.

for the desktop, however, linux is a horrible choice because of
the sheer lack of software, particularly quality software. major
companies, such as adobe and microsoft, ignore it. even smaller
players, such as garmin, ignore it.

Adobe isn't ignoring Linux...They're supporting flash and reader on
linux, again. Microsoft certainly isn't ignoring it! Where have you been?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window...stem_for_Linux

flash is dead and reader for linux has been discontinued.

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/10/a...nload-pulled-w
ebsite

Garmins GPS devices run linux....

it doesn't matter what it runs internally because that's never exposed
to the user.

as i said, linux is a reasonable choice for embedded devices.

And you can get the garmin to talk
to a linux box, it just may not be as simple as Windows or Mac.

that's what unsupported means.

while you're trying to get it to work, mac/windows users already synced
their data and are off doing whatever it is they want to do with the
gps.




Gimp isn't supposed to be a replacement for Photoshop, so I don't
see why you're even bringing it up? As far as running substantially
slower on the same hardware, that hasn't been my experience...So,
what hardware specifically are you using for the comparison?

it doesn't matter what hardware it is.

pick whatever hardware you want.

the gimp will be substantially slower than photoshop on the very same
hardware, over 10x slower in some cases. it's shocking how unoptimized
the gimp is.

adobe spends an insane amount of time optimizing the hell out of
photoshop, going to such extreme lengths as tuning it to specific
processor variants as well as designing their own virtual memory system
that's optimized for image processing, which goes well beyond the
limitations of the operating system.

Btw, Gimp supports some of the photoshop native plugins now, too.
http://www.techradar.com/how-to/how-...lugins-in-gimp

only filter plugins, and of those, not all of them, and of the ones
that do work, there are numerous compatibility issues.

a graphics professional will not touch the gimp.

graphics professionals don't have the time to waste ****ing around
trying to get crappy products to work. they can afford professional
tools, which pay for themselves.

Excellent answers, 'nospam'. :-)

--
Sometimes man stumbles over the truth. (W.Churchill)

On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 00:30:28 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

My first question is "is the Apple 5k utilizing and 8 bit, 10 bit or
what image stream?"

quartz supports 16 bpc, or 64 bpp.

From the blurb for the forthcoming 5k iMac I
suspect it is using a 10 bit image stream. Very likely that also
applies to the current 5ks and those of the recent past. So what
happens with the 8 bit graphics disgorged by the software in the
computer? My guess is that it is massaged by some kind of lookup table
(LUT).

what matters is accuracy, not whether it uses a lut or not.

The answer to whether or not it utilises preset color spaces is that
it has sRGB, Adobe and DCI-P3 preinstalled. So somewhere there is a
mechanism for converting the standard screen output data stream to the
data stream required by the 5k. And all of this has to be capable of
calibration.

mac os handles any colour space conversions that are needed.

more than you ever wanted to know:
https://developer.apple.com/library/...13/_index.html


tl;dr
https://developer.apple.com/library/content/technotes/tn2313/Art/tn2313_whathappensinappall.jpg

That first one was quite interesting but the only stuff new to me was
the Apple-specific items. The second one was (I think) contained in
the first.

In any case, my question was directed to the hardware of the 5k, which
screen was not mentioned specifically that I could see.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 02 Jul 2017 21:57:52 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

When I get my 5K iMac I will let you know.

Are you waiting for the new model?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 01:04:03 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:


External monitors with their own internal LUT require special software
software to write
new LUTs to the monitor. The Apple 5k is slightly different in that all its
firmware is incorporated into the computer.

The MacOS system preferences for displays gives you the option for using
external, or mirrored displays. Calibration profiles are applied
individually.

something windows still doesn't do properly.

It certainly requires individual calibration profiles for each screen.
I guess mirrored displays would be desirable for laptops but I have no
knowledge of how Windows handles that.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

External monitors with their own internal LUT require special software
software to write
new LUTs to the monitor. The Apple 5k is slightly different in that all
its
firmware is incorporated into the computer.

The MacOS system preferences for displays gives you the option for using
external, or mirrored displays. Calibration profiles are applied
individually.

something windows still doesn't do properly.

It certainly requires individual calibration profiles for each screen.

obviously.

the trick is for apps to use the correct profile and colour depth at
all times, even when the content spans the border of two displays with
different capabilities, without apps needing to special case anything.

this is something macs have done without issue for over 30 years, but
for windows, it's been a mixed bag. these days, it mostly works, but
there are still situations where it doesn't.

I guess mirrored displays would be desirable for laptops but I have no
knowledge of how Windows handles that.

mirrored is rarely desirable, largely because the external display will
usually have a higher resolution, so mirroring will letterbox it.
that's a complete waste.

spanning is what's normally done.

a common use case is a presenter uses the laptop for his own notes,
while the attached projector (or large external display) shows the
presentation.

another common use case is the user connects an external display while
at home or at the office, with apps using all displays (most macbooks
support 3 displays and in some cases more), then disconnecting when in
transit or traveling. any offscreen content is automatically relocated
until its native position has a corresponding display (another thing
windows doesn't quite get right).

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

When I get my 5K iMac I will let you know.

Are you waiting for the new model?

the only one that's not out yet is the imac pro, expected in december,
and i don't think he's planning on spending quite that much, nor does
he need it's power.

the 5k imac was updated a month ago with same day availability.