Where does Lightroom display color space?

Where does Lightroom display color space assigned to an image? It should be in the metadata panel. In Bridge it displays Color Mode: RGB/B&W and Color Space: sRGB/Gray Gamma 2.2. Or does Lightroom convert everything to Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB?

LR's internal working space is a variation of the ProPhoto RGB space, ProPhoto RGB's gamut but with a linear tone curve instead of the standard gamma 1.8 curve. This is because it is primarily a Raw editor and Raw sensor data is linear and because the ProPhoto gamut will more or less include all the colors most digital cameras can capture (depending on the filters in front of the lens, some cameras may capture ultra-red that is outside ProPhoto RGB). Retaining the linearity of the data makes editing calculations easier, faster, more flexible and more accurate since data has not been lost to the quantization errors involved in gamma correction. So for a Raw file the workflow is the assignation of the camera profile and conversion from that to linear ProPhoto RGB. However, the display data from the Develop module (the data sent to your monitor) undergoes a further conversion that involves the application of the sRGB tone curve, which is sort of gamma 2.2 but not exactly. This is because linear image data looks terrible - very dark and flat. Thus, the display is in a hybrid space called Melissa RGB, ProPhoto primaries and sRGB tonal response curve. At the time of export or printing a conversion is done from linear ProPhoto RGB to the output space designated by the user, which can be any RGB space - ProPhoto RGB, Adobe RGB, sRGB or any other one, provided you have an ICC profile for it in your OS's Color folder..
Previews used by the Library module are jpgs in the Adobe RGB space.

Similar Messages

  • Where does Lightroom save color correction info?

    I'm having a problem with Lightroom in the way it saves the color correction information attached to a raw file.
    I'm using raw files off of an external hard drive, color correcting them and then saving that whole folder to my internal hard drive.
    The problem is that after I disconnect the external hard drive and import the folder from my internal hard drive, none of the file conversions I just made are showing. This is extreamly frustrating and time consuming as I'm adjusting about 1000 files at a time.
    Why is this?
    The external drive is my client's so I have to find a way to get the color corrected raw files on both drives.
    Thanks to anyone that can help

    Here is my work flow:
    Working on 1 computer in 1 version of Lightroom that is set up to save the Catalog on my internal hard drive.
    I attach client's external drive and use the Lightroom Import dialog to add files to catalog without moving (they stay on the external and I edit them there).
    Working in Lightroom I make the adjustments to the CR2 files that have stayed on the external drive.
    "At the end select all the images and save metadata to file."  I believe I have missed this step. I though Lightroom did this automaticly.
    Is this my problem?
    After making the adjustments I selected all of the files from the external and copied them to my internal drive, however I did this outside of Lightroom.
    This may have been a problem also.
    If my catalog has been stored on my internal drive the whole time why did the developing information not get saved to it?
    "You can also do this by exporting a catalog file from the  source machine to the external disk and then importing
    this  catalog into the target machine."
    Using this technique in the future could I do all of this?
    1. edit the files directly on the external drive
    2. save the metadata to the files
    3. export the files (though lightroom) onto my internal hard drive
    4. have the raw files on my internal hard drive with the saved development made to them and be able to open them in lightroom and see them adjusted
    5. have the raw files on my client's external hard drive with the saved development  made to them and be able to open them in lightroom on another computer and see them adjusted
    Thanks again for all of your help!
    C

  • Where does Lightroom keep my photos?

    I always import my photos from my CF card into my USB external hard drive. When I view my hard drive, Finder shows all my photos and I always thought that's where my pictures were.
    Then, I unplugged my laptop, took it to another location, and run Lightroom on battery. Wait a minute, all the photos I thought were on the USB external hard drive which is now disconnected showed up and play perfectly in slide show.
    I went Finder through every file in the Macintosh HD, I can't see a single photo, yet Lightroom is definitely keeping a copy of it somewhere in the Mac HD.
    My questions are:
    (1) Where does Lightroom hide these photos?
    (2) How does this impact my Macintosh HD storage capacity?
    (3) How can I remove these photos from the Macintosh HD so that if I lost my Macbook Pro, the thief cannot steal my photos.
    Please help.
    Thank you all in advance.
    Eddie

    What you are seeing are the previews that Lr generates for every image that gets imported.
    (1) These previews are not hidden but are in the same directory as the Lr database. Read more here:
    http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=333660
    (2) Lr previews -- depending on what size you generate and the number of images imported -- can consume a lot of space. But disk is cheap.
    (3) Paranoia is no reason to delete the previews. Don't lose your laptop!

  • Where Does Lightroom Store  Catalogs, Previews, and Backups?

    1.   By default, where does LR store:
    a. Catalogs (.lrcat)
    b. Previews (.lrdata)
    c. Backups of Catalogs and Previews
    2.  Can these locations be changed?
    2a. If so, how does one specify where LR will store each of the above?
    3. Is there a specific relationship of location the Catalog, the Preview, and the Backups, or any partial combination of those three,  must remain in?
    3a. If so, what is/are that/those relationships?

    a) By default in the Lightroom folder within My Pictures / Pictures
    b) Always in the same folder as the catalogue
    c) Wherever you tell it - which should be somewhere different. No backup of Previews.
    Re 2, just move the catalogue in Explorer / Finder, double click it. If you didn't move the Previews, LR starts a new one in the same folder as the catalogue, following (b) above.
    Re 3, answered above. Backups can / should be elsewhere and it's your choice where.
    Notice that in Catalog Settings there's a Show button that reveals where your catalogue is.

  • Why does Photoshop display colors differently from the other applications even in sRGB mode ?

    Hello all !
    Here is my problem :
    Photoshop is set to use sRGB workspace (in edit/colors.../workspace/RVB).
    If I understand correctly this is how all native windows applications work.
    This means Photoshop and the other applications should display the same colors on a file with a sRGB profile.
    Now this is the case until I calibrate my monitor.
    When I do, Photoshop colors become different from the other applications (irfanview, explorer, browsers...).
    The only way I found to let everything display the same colors is to set Photoshop to use Proofing/RVB Monitor.
    What upsets me even more is that Photoshop colors look "better" to me (dark grays seem to dark to me in the other applications.)
    I have read that this is because Photoshop takes the new profile into account and others applications do not. But I don't think this is relevant here because everything is in sRGB so the only profile is my monitor's and I think calibration is handled globally by windows : everything (including browsers, explorer, and Photoshop) changes color if I choose to apply the monitor's profile or not with windows color management tool ("use my parameters for this device").
    Here is my system configuration :
    - Photoshop CS4 (11.0.2)
    - Windows 7 64 bits
    - HP ZR2440W and DELL 2209WA (these are not wide gamut screens)
    I have spent two days trying to figure the logics behind this and really am upset. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Don't hesitate to ask me if there is something that is unclear or some information I forgot to mention.
    Thanks in advance,
    Yannick

    That sounds like an invitation to continue to talk about the issue.  Fair enough.
    I'm not sure where you're getting "insecurity"...  I am just trying to help you help others more effectively.
    I invite you to re-read just the first sentence of what you wrote very carefully, putting yourself in the shoes of someone struggling with both the terminology and the concepts:
    Photoshop (CMS) reads an embedded ICC profile and CONVERTS it to the custom monitor profile for a theoretical 'true color' display
    Think about what "Photoshop (CMS)" might mean to a person who doesn't know the acronym might stand for "Color Management System" (which is I assume what you meant).  Adobe themselves don't call it "CMS", they use the acronym "CMM" (Color Management Module).  The term "CMS" is used in the computer industry for about a dozen different things.
    While a color profile might have been embedded in an image file before it was opened by Photoshop, Photoshop works on documents.  A profile is not "embedded" in a document, it is maintained by Photoshop with the document and describes the color values in the document.  If Photoshop opens a document without an embedded profile, depending on settings and user choices it might assign a profile or it might even operate on the document without color-management.  Oversimplification doesn't help people when they're trying to learn new things unless it's described as such, for example, "This is a bit of an oversimplification..." or "Generally speaking..."
    Not every monitor profile is a "custom monitor profile".  Quite often a standard profile (e.g., sRGB IEC61966-2.1) is associated with a monitor by the operating system as a default, or a factory profile is installed by a driver package or system update.  Your use of the term "custom" is a bit ambiguous and could be read as implying the creation of a profile using a calibration and profiling device specific to the particular monitor.
    Photoshop's color management code does not convert an embedded ICC profile at all (read carefully what you wrote).  As I said, it transforms color values.  That was the key error in your description that prompted me to comment.
    If ever there is a time to pick words carefully, it's in a color-management discussion.
    -Noel

  • Lightroom displays colors differently than Photoshop

    Lightroom (and my image previewer - IfranView) display my image colors differently than photoshop.  This is very disturbing (why can't Adobe make this simple!)! 
    Image in question - see below.  Center image is Photoshop, left is Lr 4 and right is InfranView.
    Colorspace:  AdobeRGB 1998
    Image color (exported the TIFF file in Lr, what is shown below):  AdobeRGB 1998
    NOTE:  when I export out as sRGB, IfranView displays it correctly (I don't know why, it can't display ProPhoto correctly, but never had a problem with AdobeRGB).  Lightroom looks incorrect when viewing the TIFF, AdobeRGB JPEG and sRGB JPEG.
    What is going on??  I've tried this on two computers now and it is the same problem!

    The larger file is Adobe RGB and the smaller file is sRGB.  I see no difference in overall tone or color between the two files in LR 3, LR 4, LR 5, PS CS5, PS CS6, PS CC 2014, or Windows Photo Viewer which is color-managed, aside from an almost imperceptible change in the darkest blacks which I'd expect since you're converting AdobeRGB to sRGB at some point.
    I can make the Adobe RGB one look like it does at the left of your first screenshot if I Assign Profile: sRGB to it in PS.
    Since your monitor appears to be wide-gamut and therefore similar to Adobe RGB, I think the problem you're having is that LR thinks the monitor is sRGB for some reason, perhaps due to your switching the cables from one computer to the other without rebooting and recalibrating.  It's also possible that your profile is stored in the monitor rather than in the computer and one computer understands this and the other doesn't so you're getting double-profiling or no profiling occurring.
    It sounds the your only issue is having two computers attached alternatively to one monitor without having a valid profile on each computer for that monitor and aren't restarting each computer to load that profile.  At least that is my analysis given the limited information.
    I would conclude that nothing is wrong with LR or PS just the hardware connections and the color management confusion between the two computers, not your confusion, the computers'.

  • Where does Lightroom put HDR in the grid view? Is there anyway to have Lightroom stack the HDR file with the source files?

    I can't decipher where (and why) the program is putting the HDR image in the grid. I stack all of my HDR source images so they are easy to track and manage. Other apps/plugins allow you to stack resulting images with their source image. That would be great if there's a way to set that in LR preferences.

    Thanks, but this doesn't really answer the question about stacking the HDR file with the source files. Yes, it does put the file in the same folder, however many of my folders have 100s of images (that often look similar) and as far as I can tell, LR places them randomly in the sort order. It doesn't appear to put them at the beginning or end of the sort (usually by date), but somewhere randomly in the middle. Even if it could be made clear what method it is using to sort them, that would help locate one file among hundreds.
    Ideally, however it should allow you to stack with the stacked source files. Is there anyway to do this? If not, is it a feature that could be requested?

  • Where does Lightroom 2 store my libraries (OSX)?

    I am wondering where LR2 stores my libraries on OSX.  If they are files imported from other directories, can I now delete those directories?

    I am wondering where LR2 stores my libraries on OSX. 
    To find your catalog, go to Edit>Catalog Settings, clcik the Show button on General page.
    To find where your image files are, Ctrl-click/right-click on any folder or image and choose Show in Finder.
    If they are files imported from other directories, can I now delete those directories?
    If during import you've chosen to Copy files to new location then it's safe to delete the files from their original location. If you've chosen Add photos without moving, then of course you shouldn't delete them, since Lightroom is referencing them at their original location.

  • Outlook 2013 Bug - Categories Column Does Not Display Color In Certain Positions

    My System: Outlook 2013-64 on Windows 7-64
    When looking at my email list (preview pane off), the categories column displays its color and text. But when the Categories column is moved to the left of the "from" column, it ceases to display its color and displays only its text, even when
    the column is wide enough to display everything for a category.
    Can someone tell me  how to fix this?
    This did not happen in Outlook 2010 and 2007.

    Hi,
    I just confirmed this issue exists on Outlook 2013, when categories
    column is dragged to the left to From, the categories don't display the colors but label texts instead.
    While I didn't find this issue on Outlook 2010 or Outlook 2007.
    Thank you for being so careful and pointing out this problem, whenver you have any feedback about this product, you can always press Ctrl + Alt + 7(Send a Smile) or Ctrl + Alt + 8(Send a Frown) to submit it. Currently I cannot promise the
    deadline when it will be fixed, but Microsoft will definitely hear users' voice and make its products better and easy to use.
    Regards,
    Melon Chen
    TechNet Community Support

  • Where does bcc display name come from

    Hello ...
    I have my iPad mail set up to bcc me; while the address is right the display name is wrong (I know only I can see it!).
    Where is this dislay name pulled from? Everywhere I look in contacts and settings it seems to be correct.
    Thanks,
    d

    Not sure. Might be something in these links.
    Setting up and troubleshooting Mail
    http://www.apple.com/support/ipad/assistant/mail/
    iPad Mail
    http://www.apple.com/support/ipad/mail/
     Cheers, Tom

  • Watermark, color space, and transparency problem

    I'm having a problem with inserting a watermark image into my pdfs.
    I created the watermark image in Photoshop. It is 8-bit gray with a transparent background. I saved it as a pdf (pdf 1.4 to allow transparency).
    The main pdfs (to be watermarked) are created through a seperate process (they are scans of old book pages). The pdfs are produced from 8-bit gray tiff images, but I cannot determine what color space the these pdfs are.
    To the problem: in Acrobat 9, when I insert the watermark above, all of the blacks on the page shift to grey, as if the opacity was shifted lower. The opacity is set to 100%, so this should not be a problem! The watermark does have a transparent background, though.
    Since this seems to be a color space conflict, if I save the watermark PDF in CYMK or RGB, it does not cause the tonal shift (blacks remain true), but the watermark now has an opaque background. I need it to be transparent, as the background of the files to be watermarked are not tonally consistent (old discolored paper).
    I guess these are my questions:
    (1) Is there any way to determine the color space of a PDF? File->Properties does not list color space.
    (2) Why does the watermark PDF, saved in CYMK or RGB, not allow a transparent background? Is this an Acrobat issue or color space?
    (3) Does anyone have an idea on how to solve this? :)
    Thanks a bunch.

    First, I have 2 questions: 1) How do the color and watermark background look when you have Advanced > Print Production > Output Preview open? 2) What version of Acrobat are you working in?
    The most common reason that people see an almost "washed out" appearance (or looking as though additional opacity is applied) is due to a bug in Acrobat 8. This was fixed in the 8.1 dot release. One way to determine if this is what you are running into is to view the file with the Output Preview dialog open. If it views correctly then, make sure you have the update installed.
    I don't work with watermarks, but understanding the general concept of watermarks it seems like a reasonable guess that they would use overprinting. I'm wonder if this is what is affecting the display of them (non-transparent background) since Acrobat needs Overprint Preview ON to accurately display objects with overprint flags . As with above, turning on Output Preview will help you deduce if that's what is happening since Output Preview automatically enables Overprint Preview (which is off by default).
    BTW, Preflight will let you know what color spaces are in PDF file. Run any Profile. In the results panel, drop down the "Overview" section. There you will find a color spaces section listing the color spaces of the document.

  • Color space in file?

    has anyone seen this error message, 'Organizer does not support color space in the file'? Pls help

    Elements does RGB, sRGB, Adobe RGB, index, grayscale. It doesn't do CMYK, LAB, etc.

  • Why does Lightroom (and Photoshop) use AdobeRGB and/or ProPhoto RGB as default color spaces, when most monitors are standard gamut (sRGB) and cannot display the benefits of those wider gamuts?

    I've asked this in a couple other places online as I try to wrap my head around color management, but the answer continues to elude me. That, or I've had it explained and I just didn't comprehend. So I continue. My confusion is this: everywhere it seems, experts and gurus and teachers and generally good, kind people of knowledge claim the benefits (in most instances, though not all) of working in AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. And yet nobody seems to mention that the majority of people - including presumably many of those championing the wider gamut color spaces - are working on standard gamut displays. And to my mind, this is a huge oversight. What it means is, at best, those working this way are seeing nothing different than photos edited/output in sRGB, because [fortunately] the photos they took didn't include colors that exceeded sRGB's real estate. But at worst, they're editing blind, and probably messing up their work. That landscape they shot with all those lush greens that sRGB can't handle? Well, if they're working in AdobeRGB on a standard gamut display, they can't see those greens either. So, as I understand it, the color managed software is going to algorithmically reign in that wild green and bring it down to sRGB's turf (and this I believe is where relative and perceptual rendering intents come into play), and give them the best approximation, within the display's gamut capabilities. But now this person is editing thinking they're in AdobeRGB, thinking that green is AdobeRGB's green, but it's not. So any changes they make to this image, they're making to an image that's displaying to their eyes as sRGB, even if the color space is, technically, AdobeRGB. So they save, output this image as an AdobeRGB file, unaware that [they] altered it seeing inaccurate color. The person who opens this file on a wide gamut monitor, in the appropriate (wide gamut) color space, is now going to see this image "accurately" for the first time. Only it was edited by someone who hadn't seen it accurately. So who know what it looks like. And if the person who edited it is there, they'd be like, "wait, that's not what I sent you!"
    Am I wrong? I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. I shoot everything RAW, and I someday would love to see these photos opened up in a nice, big color space. And since they're RAW, I will, and probably not too far in the future. But right now I export everything to sRGB, because - internet standards aside - I don't know anybody who I'd share my photos with, who has a wide gamut monitor. I mean, as far as I know, most standard gamut monitors can't even display 100% sRGB! I just bought a really nice QHD display marketed toward design and photography professionals, and I don't think it's 100. I thought of getting the wide gamut version, but was advised to stay away because so much of my day-to-day usage would be with things that didn't utilize those gamuts, and generally speaking, my colors would be off. So I went with the standard gamut, like 99% of everybody else.
    So what should I do? As it is, I have my Photoshop color space set to sRGB. I just read that Lightroom as its default uses ProPhoto in the Develop module, and AdobeRGB in the Library (for previews and such).
    Thanks for any help!
    Michael

    Okay. Going bigger is better, do so when you can (in 16-bit). Darn, those TIFs are big though. So, ideally, one really doesn't want to take the picture to Photoshop until one has to, right? Because as long as it's in LR, it's going to be a comparatively small file (a dozen or two MBs vs say 150 as a TIF). And doesn't LR's develop module use the same 'engine' or something, as ACR plug-in? So if your adjustments are basic, able to be done in either LR Develop, or PS ACR, all things being equal, choose to stay in LR?
    ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
    PS RGB Workspace:  ProPhotoRGB and I convert any 8-bit documents to 16-bit before doing any adjustments.
    Why does one convert 8-bit pics to 16-bit? Not sure if this is an apt comparison, but it seems to me that that's kind of like upscaling, in video. Which I've always taken to mean adding redundant information to a file so that it 'fits' the larger canvas, but to no material improvement. In the case of video, I think I'd rather watch a 1080p movie on an HD (1080) screen (here I go again with my pixel-to-pixel prejudice), than watch a 1080p movie on a 4K TV, upscaled. But I'm ready to be wrong here, too. Maybe there would be no discernible difference? Maybe even though the source material were 1080p, I could still sit closer to the 4K TV, because of the smaller and more densely packed array of pixels. Or maybe I only get that benefit when it's a 4K picture on a 4K screen? Anyway, this is probably a different can of worms. I'm assuming that in the case of photo editing, converting from 8 to 16-bit allows one more room to work before bad things start to happen?
    I'm recent to Lightroom and still in the process of organizing from Aperture. Being forced to "this is your life" through all the years (I don't recommend!), I realize probably all of my pictures older than 7 years ago are jpeg, and probably low-fi at that. I'm wondering how I should handle them, if and when I do. I'm noting your settings, ssprengel.
    ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
    I save my PS intermediate or final master copy of my work as a 16-bit TIF still in the ProPhotoRGB, and only when I'm ready to share the image do I convert to sRGB then 8-bits, in that order, then do File / Save As: Format=JPG.
    Part of the same question, I guess - why convert back to 8-bits? Is it for the recipient?  Do some machines not read 16-bit? Something else?
    For those of you working in these larger color spaces and not working with a wide gamut display, I'd love to know if there are any reasons you choose not to. Because I guess my biggest concern in all of this has been tied to what we're potentially losing by not seeing the breadth of the color space we work in represented while making value adjustments to our images. Based on what several have said here, it seems that the instances when our displays are unable to represent something as intended are infrequent, and when they do arise, they're usually not extreme.
    Simon G E Garrett Apr 29, 2015 4:57 AM
    With 8 bits, there are 256 possible values.  If you use those 8 bits to cover a wider range of colours, then the difference between two adjacent values - between 100 and 101, say - is a larger difference in colour.  With ProPhoto RGB in 8-bits there is a chance that this is visible, so a smooth colour wedge might look like a staircase.  Hence ProPhoto RGB files might need to be kept as 16-bit TIFs, which of course are much, much bigger than 8-bit jpegs.
    Over the course of my 'studies' I came across a side-by-side comparison of either two color spaces and how they handled value gradations, or 8-bit vs 16-bit in the same color space. One was a very smooth gradient, and the other was more like a series of columns, or as you say, a staircase. Maybe it was comparing sRGB with AdobeRGB, both as 8-bit. And how they handled the same "section" of value change. They're both working with 256 choices, right? So there might be some instances where, in 8-bit, the (numerically) same segment of values is smoother in sRGB than in AdobeRGB, no? Because of the example Simon illustrated above?
    Oh, also -- in my Lumix LX100 the options for color space are sRGB or AdobeRGB. Am I correct to say that when I'm shooting RAW, these are irrelevant or ignored? I know there are instances (certain camera effects) where the camera forces the shot as a jpeg, and usually in that instance I believe it will be forced sRGB.
    Thanks again. I think it's time to change some settings..

  • Problem of color spaces when i switch between photoshop cc 2014 and lightroom 5.7. where to ask

    hallo,
    where can we ask questions on photoshop cc 2014 tools ?
    i have a prophoto nef in lightroom which is retouched.
    i edit in photoshop cc to make a selection and come back to lightroom with a huge psd.
    it says color space of photoshop is not correct and advises prophoto. i say yes.
    first one day i lost the pen tool mask when i wanted to re-edit from lightroom. fortunately the version of psd on hard disk was ok. never understood what happened
    second is i want to open a jpg background on my hard disk, perhaps srgb, in photoshop and add the selection.
    how to manage color spaces because my colors of the selection or the background become ugly
    not sure i still need to use lightroom for this step. bridge or photoshop itselfs can open files,...
    best regards
    marc

    That's great, but what exactly did it - matrix (gamma) profiles instead of LUT? It would be good to know for future reference.
    I have seen small problems with LUT profiles in Firefox, like black clipping up to value 6 or 7, but Lightroom seems to behave well with LUT profiles here. The problem with LUT profiles is that they are "heavier" and more complex, because they contain complete tables for all possible transformations - whereas matrix profiles do it by much simpler mathematical formulae. LUT is more accurate, but matrix simpler and more reliable.
    Not that I think accuracy is a problem with Eizo CGs. Which is why it's a bit puzzling that ColorNavigator has LUT as default. I use mostly matrix targets these days, my feeling is that the simpler the profile, the better.

  • What color space does Adobe's Cinema Display have?

    I just calibrated my Macbook Pro with a Spyder3Elite and got a bit desapointed when I descovered that the best color space it can show is sRGB. After finding this, and since I've been thinking about buying an iMac for a while, I got a bit frightened. Thus, I changed my atention to Adobe's Cinema Display in hope that it has a larger color gamut.
    The thing is I can't seam to find anyone that can tell me what color space does this displays can produce, iMac nor Cinema Display. If there's anyone who has already calibrated any of these displays, can you tell me what's the best color space they can work on?
    Thanks in advance.

    Ok, I'll try to be clearer to the best of my abilities.
    1st off, There are 2 kinds of color spaces. Device-dependent and device-independent. Hence, a display has a limited color gamut that it can produce, it has it's own color space.
    When I calibrated mine, this was the result:
    Purple: Adobe RGB 1998
    Green: sRGB
    Red: Display's Gamut
    The thing is, before I calibrated my monitor, I thought it had an Adobe RGB 1998. Got pretty desapointed when I found out it didn't... Nevertheless, what I'm looking is to know if there's any Apple display with a larger gamut than the one from my Mac or if they're all sRGB...
    Hope to have been more clear this time.

Maybe you are looking for