This is Very Misleading and not accurate
The following statement from the article is very misleading and makes it sound like they just "invented" colour.
"(1)The new xvYCC color standard is a real innovation. (2)Current color standards represent only a small portion of colors that are viewable by the human eye. Take a look at the diagram (below). This is a standard type of diagram used to display color spaces (the colors that can be depicted by a given device). (3)The shaded area represents the colors in nature that the human eye can see. The triangle is a representation of the RGB color space. These are the colors that this color space can define. As you can see, this means that such devices cannot accurately represent many colors that exist in nature – leading to the sometimes (4)“cartoony” look that you see on some displays. (5)What is worse is that current display technologies, such as backlit LCD displays, can display colors far beyond those described by previously existing color space standards. R B G"
(1)The first thing to point out is the xvYCC colour standard is only a real innovation for Digital Display and Recording.
(2)Colour is created with light. Without light there is no colour. The RGB Colour space is still the largest available. I have not heard of any devise that can display more colours than RGB. That would be a huge headling in the graphics industry. This is why all of those people with CRT's are still holding on to them with a death grip. A good quality CRT will still display the largest colour space
(3)The Colour space in nature is much larger. We have not been able to produce a consumer appliance that can enlargen the colour space. It has been done in a lab using CRT type equipment. In nature there is a constant variation in Luminosity, also wave lengths of colour may only be partially represented (Example on a forest floor under all of the trees, in nature, much of the green color spectrum is removed dynamically by the tree canopy above. This will make colours that you can not see mechanically. Any display technology that we have created to date will not "produce" the green colour to give you "Like" colours, not "filter" out the green.
(4) I have yet to see anything other than a Cartoon look Cartoony on my 21" Viewsonic CRT monitor or any good CRT television. The banding comes "not" from being unable to define a colour, it comes from not being able to display all of the colours it is supposed to. The devise is unable to produce the required light wavelength.
(5) This is complete marketing "hyper-speak" and completely false. This is only true if one speaks of Digital descriptions of colour. I can describe every colour in the universe using a digital code, and my LCD monitor may understand each digital code, but it still can't display all of those described colours (see point 3).
People seem to miss the most important point with colour. If you look at the colour space picture, it is not how large the triangle is, its how smooth and even it is. This is why CRT's always looked good. LCD's usually have a colour space that leans towards the red wavelengths. I have always found that red can look absolutly spectacular on LCD's. but LCD's clip the corners of the green and blue wavelengths. Plasma is known for producing amazing blue colours. But nether one of these technologies produces more colours than an RGB CRT screen. Different yes, larger no.
But if it all came down to picture quality, "just picture quality", I would still buy a CRT.
