In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

As I find it strange that a lot of pro photographers do use Macs, lots
of
graphic editors use Macs, lots of teching establishmetns use macs, we
do
here, specifically brough for multimedia teaching, the only time we use
PCs
is when quality doesnlt matter such as write up sending emails looking
at
websites, and teaching code writing and such.

I can't explain the photographers or teaching establishments but most
graphic editors work with commercial print media or sRGB,

the ****ty ones might. the better graphic editors do not.

Correct me o learned one: what do they use?

argb, and now dci-p3 is becoming common.

That's a color space and has nothing much to do with the abilities of
the monitor.

false.

neither of
which are worrth a damn when it comes to resolving fine detail in the
shadows.

also wrong.

Even the best of commercial print media is limited in it's ability to
print a really deep black, let alone display subtle variations in deep
grey tonality. You may believe otherwise but there is a fortune
waiting for you if you can prove your claims for a conventional
commercial printing system.

deep black != shadow detail.

But the ability to display subtle variations in in deep grey tonality
does = shadow detail.

false.

Please note that I did say at the beginning "most graphic editors work
with commercial print media or sRGB". I'm not talking about specialty
print techniques.

most ****ty ones do. the better ones do not.

The better ones are not 'most'.

you're contradicting yourself again.

I'm not pursuing this any further.

wise choice.