Re: Difference between Apple CMM and Heildelberg CMM
Re: Difference between Apple CMM and Heildelberg CMM
- Subject: Re: Difference between Apple CMM and Heildelberg CMM
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 22:22:40 -0600
Henrik Holmegaard <email@hidden> writes:
>
And let's try to keep a lid on CMM issues overall. It's strategic industry
>
stuff and therefore highly explosive. From a user point of view what we need
>
to think about is how to measure and apply profiles properly. We can't do
>
anything with CMMs except choose among those which are open and
>
non-proprietary.
This makes no sense at all. You are bastardizing the proprietary and
non-open CMM's, and yet you make no similar complaint regarding the
proprietary nature of the contents of ICC profiles themselves. We don't
just get plain ordinary measurements in ICC profiles - they've been
massaged to varying degrees, in particular the perceptual rendering
intent - using proprietary means in every profiling package on the
planet. This is not open, so where is the criticism there?
If everything is open and there is no difference between products then
the only difference comes down to user interface and price. And as anyone
who runs business knows, you must have as much value added to your
product without it being excessively complex, in order to have a product
that you can sell. It's product differentiation.
The current CMM implementation is a bad one because uses are led to
believe there will be some difference in output when there is very little
difference as a result of using conventional CMM's. It makes something
more confusing and there is no corresponding benefit. It's one of those
skeleton in the closet things for the ICC.
Making CMM's smarter (and by definition MORE proprietary) is the only way
I can think of to improve this technology and make it easier to use. We
are at the limits of what can be achieved with 'smart' profiles that
don't have a single bit of code in them.
Chris Murphy
Color Remedies (tm)
Boulder, CO
303-415-9932