Can your display handle wide gamut, /g/? Does this pic look like a solid red box to you, or do you see a logo inside?
https://webkit.org/blog-files/color-gamut/
https://webkit.org/blog-files/color-gamut/comparison.html
My experience:
Galaxy S6:
>can see the red webkit logo, but can't see the difference in all the other pics
Asus Zenbook UX305CA (72% NTSC gamut, 100% sRGB gamut):
>can't see the red webkit logo
>can see the different colors in all the other pics
that was a bit weird, desu. i know for a fact that the galaxy s6 has a wide gamut display, it's a fucking AMOLED. I don't know if Chrome on Android simply can't handle color management or something.
>>55535255
I don't see anything. Why does wide gamut matter anyway?
Dell XPS 13:
>Shoes: No difference
>Webkit logo: Clear difference
>Iceland: Clear difference
>Italy: Clear difference
>Flowers: No difference
>Yellow Flower: Clear difference
>Sunset: Clear difference
>Rose: No difference
>>55535255
>Shoes: No difference
>Webkit logo: No difference or logo
>Iceland: Slight difference
>Italy: Slight difference
>Flowers: No difference
>Yellow Flower: Slight difference
>Sunset: Slight difference
>Rose: No difference
Didn't really expect much out of a cheapo IPS, but hey, it was $110.
>>55535517
I thought the xps 13 had one of the best laptop displays?
>>55535568
Wow.
>>55535667
>Wow.
?
>4 nonitors displaying wide gamut fine
>one that should, doesn't
>check settings
>AMD have removed color depth and advance settings from driver settings
what the flying fuck?
>>55536145
It's in some advanced menu or something. Not fully removed but not in the new menu
>>55536165
Raedon advanced settings?
yeah, that doesn't work either
>>55536145
>blindly updating software because "update must = better"
>>55536185
oh really?
cool - link me the older ccc driver that works with r9 380 would you?
thought so
It pretty much is. Difference is clear on P3 photos but not on aRGB photos. I think the only laptop that supports aRGB is that meme Razer
>>55536219
Was meant for >>55535667
>Shoes: No difference
>Webkit logo: can't see
>Iceland: Clear difference
>Italy: Clear difference
>Flowers: No difference
>Yellow Flower: Clear difference
>Sunset: Clear difference
>Rose: No difference
$30 E248WFP
>>55535517
Same results with my Asus VG248QE.
>>55536358
>>55536319
Do you guys just have shitty eyes or is there actually no difference?
>>55536474
>Do you guys just have shitty monitors or is there actually no difference?
>>55536474
I see placebos work well on /g/.
>>55536670
No kidding though, I actually had to look closely multiple times to notice the difference in the shoes pic. The color difference is quite subtle
>>55536718
I dooooooon't believe you.
>>55535255
>lgg3
Noticeable difference with everything but adobe.
I see a clear difference in quality between my thinkpad and my moto g 2015, which confirms what I already knew.
Can't see the logo on either, though.
When the fuck will they release an X/T model with a screen that isn't shit?
>>55536754
shit, it's the opposite on my Galaxy s6. Subtle difference with Adobe RGB, can't tell difference with DCI P3, and ProPhoto looks washed out. How does Android handle color management again?
>>55535255
With desktop monitor I saw difference in all of them.
With laptop monitor (T60P) I saw difference in some of the photos, but not all of them and not the logo.
With phone (Xperia Z3) I saw difference in logo and handful of images.
The desktop is the only thing I know to be wide-gamut. I don't believe any of the other screens are.
>>55535255
ASUS PA238Q
>Shoes: i see no difference
>Webkit logo: very different, the logo is clearly evident only in Display P3
>Iceland: very different, much more vivid colors in Display P3
>Italy: very different, much more vivid colors in Display P3
>Flowers: slightly different, the most relevant changes are the flowers on the left, a little bit brighter in ProPhoto
>Yellow Flower: very different, much more vivid colors in Display P3
>Sunset: very different, much more vivid colors in Display P3
>Rose:
>sRGB vs ProPhoto: different, more vivid colors in ProPhoto
>sRGB vs Adobe RGB: different, more vivid colors in Adobe RGB
>ProPhoto vs AdobeRGB: i see no difference
>>55536204
eat dick
>>55536319
* after zooming in
Shoes: slight, slight difference
Logo: still nada
Flowers: slight brightness
Rose: No difference between sRGB and ProPhoto. Adobe looks darker.
ASUS MG278Q
Shoes: sligh difference, barely noticeable
Logo: cannot see logo
Everything else but the red flowers: huge difference between sRGB and other options
Red flowers: barely no difference at all
>>55536219
this is stupid
why isn't there one super triangle that covers everything??
>>55537224
Because physics
>>55537259
no meme answers please
Asus VX229
Can't see anything in the red box
>>55535255
On my Note Edge I can see the difference in about half of the photos, I am also color blind and weak in the reds so some of the others may be visible but not to me.
On my monitor I can see the difference in the majority of the photos but not in the webkit logo.
I haven't calibrated my monitor yet either, that could make a difference.
>>55537284
Because wavelengths.
>>55537374
still a non-answer
Galaxy S4, no screen filter (that means hyper-saturated AMOLED colors)
- webkit logo is clearly visible
- shoes get more vibrant
- other pics show no significant difference
Basically, reds become more red. The other primary colors seem unaffected.
>>55535255
The sRGB picture does not have a logo in it.
>>55535255
Lenovo y700
>Difference on all parts
>Can't see the logo on sRGB
But then again I'm colorblind.
This backed up my thoughts behind getting a pair of dell ultrasharps. Thanks, needed this. everything looks SEXY AS F
>>55537429
It is an answer, you're just not smart enough to understand it.
>>55536219
The real question is why sRGB is the defacto standard when it is clearly the shittiest (though perhaps the closest to being balanced) gamut.
>>55535255
Moto G 2013
>WebKit logo: clearly visible
>Iceland: no difference
>Shoes: slight difference on blacks
>Yellow Flower: no difference
>Italy: no difference
>Flowers: big difference on colors and contrast
>Rose: big difference in color and contrast
>Sunset: no difference
>>55535255
HP ZR30W
Can see a clear difference in every picture
![ACES+AP0+Color+Gamut+primaries[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/KRly0l8.png "ACES+AP0+Color+Gamut+primaries[1].png")
>>55537224
>>55537259
But there is one. It cucks all other colorspaces and even CIELAB itself too.
Dell P2415Q
Can see a difference in all of them but I don't know what I'm looking for specifically the one where the difference is least is the rose ProPhoto and Adobe RGB
>>55536834
>>55535277
>>55536754
>>55537363
>>55537447
>>55538106
android doesn't handle different gamuts at all, if you see differences it's just color distortion or placebo
what's happening on wide gamut phone displays is image gets converted to srgb by software, basically clipping the more saturated tints, then best case scenario if display is well calibrated is it behaves like any non-wide-gamut display and shows the srgb-converted image correctly, worst case display is uncalibrated, oversaturated and converts the color clipped image to its wider gamut putting even more distortion on the colors.
so until android implements some kind of color management, having a phone with a gamut wider than srgb is at best useless, and at worst harmful
Asus GL552VW laptop
Clear difference in every picture, I'm impressed.
>>55537704
Cheaper to manufacture, less advanced leds
>>55537704
Because its expensive as fuck
>>55538340
>point outside the graph
Is this actually used for reproducing color? If so how?
>>55535568
>>Shoes: No difference
>>Webkit logo: No difference or logo
>>Iceland: Slight difference
>>Italy: Slight difference
>>Flowers: No difference
>>Yellow Flower: Slight difference
>>Sunset: Slight difference
>>Rose: No difference
I'm on a shit laptop and I got the same, except the last one, the rose, there's a slight difference, but it's less noticeable than the others. All the small differences looks like over saturation to me.
>shoes :
no difference
>logo :
no difference
>Iceland, Italy, yellow flower :
colors looks way more saturated
>Flowers and rose :
a very small difference, almost imperceptible
Curently on my shity 1366*768 laptop, i'll try at hom on my graphism monitor
>>55535255
old LG display 6500K & 9000K setting
>>WebKit logo: clearly visible
>>Iceland: clear difference
>>Shoes: no difference
>>Yellow Flower: visible difference
>>Italy: more saturated
>>Flowers: no difference
>>Rose: no difference
>>Sunset: huge difference (yellow vs orange)
>>55535366
It doesnt. Unless you work with like photography, graphic design, retouch, etc, anything beyond srgb is a waste of money.
t. retoucher
>>55538514
The point is to cover the visible spectrum at camera capture point. So it's an RGB color space and has 3 primaries. There's basically no other way to cover the visible spectrum on these conditions outside of going into non-color territory.
There are clear differences between them all on a Dell U2414H. No WebKit logo on the leftmost image though. Is that good or bad?
>>55535255
two things, I can see it so my screen is good, BUT I now know I have a single red pixel out near the center of my screen which I can't un-notice. So by relation I hate you OP.
>>55539631
That's weird, on my U2414H, I can't see a difference in the shoe pictures no matter how hard I try, but there's a difference on the rest of the pictures. Also no logo.
>>55535255
Tfw notice a difference in everyone on s7
>>55537704
It is what most content is calibrated to at the moment.
>>55535255
nvidia and dell ultrasharp user here
can only see the pink right box, all the others are solid reds
>srgb
>all red
>display p3
>red with logo
>out of srgb area
>pink with red logo
am I supposed to get pink
My U2412M does a nice work for its price.
>>55535255
>Lenovo Y510P with 1080p screen, running Fedora
There's a pretty big difference in every single image. Nice.
>>55535255
I don't understand what this is? The red boxes are literally just red
>>55544840
>>55544643
>>55544463
Ignore the OP pic and go to the link.
A single picture can't show multiple color spaces, idiots
>have aorus x3's god-tier display
>color saturation pops and doesn't look too saturated.
fuck me the colors on this display give me a raging hard on
Dell Ultrasharp™
They all look diferent
>>55535255
what the fuck kind of weak ass bait is this?
2/3 of the pictures are just increased saturation, and even my shitty display has a option to dynamically turn that on
>webkit.org
oh, i see it now, never mind
>>55535517
This, Dell XPS 15 UHD. Fantastic screen.
>>55538500
>Cheaper to manufacture, less advanced leds
No, this was standardized back in the days of phosphor monitors.
>>55545250
Sounds like you just don't get wide gamut
tfw messed up colors for every single one.
XG270hu here :(
got it for 250 tho so it's fine.
20" imac 9,1 2009
1. Both just red
2. Noticeable difference
3. no difference
4. Noticeable difference
5. Noticeable difference
6. No difference
7. No difference
8. Noticeable difference
Very shit display then?
Does this mean I passed or failed the test?
>>55548021
Why can i see the logo in this pic but not on the site
>>55548137
Maybe your monitor doesn't have any problem displaying it but your web browser does?
I have a Dell U2715H and couldn't tell the difference until I made the pictures bigger. P3 looks richer, more vibrant, deeper colors. Not seeing a logo, but the two reds are definitely different.
Are you supposed to see the logo or not?
>>55548419
Each image should produce a different color spectrum. Either darker or lighter or completely fucked. If it doesnt it means you do not have a wide color gamut.
Basically each image should be distinct.
>>55535255
Latest Google Chrome and GTX 980:
>can see the difference in all images
