I have just read a very interesting article that appeared recently on the Luminous Landscape site.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com …s/whats-the-problem.shtml
Here are a few excerpts:
Color only exists in the human brain.
It is more important that the media be consistent and produce pleasing color, rather than producing accurate color
So What Did I Learn About Digital Photography?
1. A film camera can output a transparency. The film manufacturer controls the color. A digital camera outputs a digital file full of numbers. Those numbers do not become color until you image them on a monitor or printer.
2. Inside the digital camera there is RAW output from the sensor. A processor in the camera then converts it from RAW to some standard color space and outputs a file. It only becomes color when that file is imaged on an accurately calibrated and profiled monitor or printer. Given this, it has always bothered me when a person reviews a new camera and comments on the color that the camera, alone, produces. Digital cameras do not output color. Cameras are only the first link in the chain.
3. The good news is you can adjust everything. You should think of a RAW file as a latent image on film. You can control the development, the gamma, the color gamut, and the tonal mapping. You can emulate almost any film or create a whole new look. You can get either pleasing color or fairly accurate color.
4. The bad news is you can adjust everything. To get what you want requires a considerable amount of new knowledge and skill.
5. A digital camera or scanner does not have a color gamut.
6. There is no such thing as “Push button color”. Color in the final analysis is a subjective experience in our brains and we all don’t see it alike. The best we can hope for from of a color management system is that it be consistent.
My problem is with statement 5. I don't understand how a camera can not have a gamut of colors that it is able to perceive and record. Can anybody help me out?
Elie
That one should be in bold type? 
