Re: ICC specification bug
Re: ICC specification bug
- Subject: Re: ICC specification bug
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2000 12:34:13 EST
In a message dated 12/9/00 1:34:03 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
It was pointed out off-line that it is not a bug to name the LUT
>
AtoB0 (alphanumeric) even if the intent is named say Absolute
>
Colorimetric (alphabetic).
>
>
In device profiles, there are individual LUTs which perform according
>
to their alphanumeric names. When device profiles are chained on the
>
fly, a preprocess LUT is built which is the equivalent of a link
>
profile.
>
There seems to be an implied agreement to consider Perceptual the defult,
both when intent is undefined, and to label an undefined intent... isn't this
what is happening here? Wouldn't AtoBn bust a lot of existing software?
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden