1 hour ago, waso said:

The maximum brightness of a monitor for photographers(!) is not really a criterion, as image editing should ideally be done (with appropriate room lighting) at a display brightness of 110-120 cd/m².

Yes for photos if you are going to print you need to turn down the display otherwise your prints come out too dark. Also a matte display tends to be better by avoiding reflections it's easier on the eyes.

The thing with sRGB vs Adobe RGB particularly for blues, you don't know what you are missing until you edit on an Adobe RGB monitor and convert to sRGB. The blues really are much nicer.

9 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

The thing with sRGB vs Adobe RGB particularly for blues, you don't know what you are missing until you edit on an Adobe RGB monitor and convert to sRGB. The blues really are much nicer.

And converting it from Adobe RGB --> sRGB is a real pita, realising the nice blue color is almost completely gone.

59 minutes ago, waso said:

And converting it from Adobe RGB --> sRGB is a real pita, realising the nice blue color is almost completely gone.

The Web runs on sRGB and many print shops work only in sRGB. For my needs of online display and creating large format (30 inch) prints, sRGB is the best choice.

I personally don't see any need for an Adobe color space monitor or workflow.

1 hour ago, Dave_Hicks said:

The Web runs on sRGB and many print shops work only in sRGB. For my needs of online display and creating large format (30 inch) prints, sRGB is the best choice.

I personally don't see any need for an Adobe color space monitor or workflow.

What happens now is most browsers assume the image is sRGB if it's not tagged, but if tagged in Adobe RGB they will render it as such. I have a printer at home which is capable of printing Adobe RGB colours and specialised print shops will also take Adobe RGB images as they have printers that can reproduce those colours. Of course if have a monitor that is restricted to sRGB colours you can't see the benefit as the monitors cannot reproduce the colours, I can assure you the colour difference is real on blue tropical water.

3 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

What happens now is most browsers assume the image is sRGB if it's not tagged, but if tagged in Adobe RGB they will render it as such. I have a printer at home which is capable of printing Adobe RGB colours and specialised print shops will also take Adobe RGB images as they have printers that can reproduce those colours. Of course if have a monitor that is restricted to sRGB colours you can't see the benefit as the monitors cannot reproduce the colours, I can assure you the colour difference is real on blue tropical water.

What is color? If 99% of PC and Phone users can only see sRGB, then i don't see the point. Why do i need to see colors that nobody else can?

Artists, film makers, publishers can deal with this for their needs. The rest of us manage to cope with sRGB.

1 hour ago, Dave_Hicks said:

I personally don't see any need for an Adobe color space monitor or workflow.

Since I also sell my images through stock photo agencies, I even have to develop them in Adobe RGB.

Converting to sRGB for the web takes me exactly 2 mouse clicks.

20 minutes ago, waso said:

Since I also sell my images through stock photo agencies, I even have to develop them in Adobe RGB.

Converting to sRGB for the web takes me exactly 2 mouse clicks.

That's a good reason. But not one that i need to be concerned about for my needs.

4 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

What is color? If 99% of PC and Phone users can only see sRGB, then i don't see the point. Why do i need to see colors that nobody else can?

Artists, film makers, publishers can deal with this for their needs. The rest of us manage to cope with sRGB.

Perhaps, but many more people can see Adobe RGB these days, I-phone and Macbooks can display DCI-P3 which gets around 90% of Adobe RGB and many laptops have similar capabilities these days if they are not base models. Even my fairly basic Yoga 7 covers DCI-P3 and extends towards covering Adobe RGB.

9 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

What is color? If 99% of PC and Phone users can only see sRGB, then i don't see the point. Why do i need to see colors that nobody else can?

Here are a few examples so everyone can compare them on their different devices.

The first image is always in Adobe RGB, the second in sRGB.

This doesn't just affect WA photography, by the way macros are affected too (depending on the background color, of course) - ok, no super macro photography 😁:

Interestingly, and I noticed this many years ago, the file size of the sRGB image is always slightly larger.

Of course, for this comparison, the browser must be color-managed - I have no idea if that's standard in all common browsers by now. My firefox does ithis in default mode.

Incidentally, the difference between sRGB and Adobe RGB isn't visible on Facebook (just tested it).

Btw: I just checked and my old smartphone (Samsung A53) can't display the differences.