Re: untagged RGB data
Re: untagged RGB data
- Subject: Re: untagged RGB data
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:04:10 -0700
On Dec 19, 2003, at 3:35 PM, Andrew Rodney wrote:
on 12/19/03 2:28 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Andrew, maybe you aren't quite realizing what you're asking for here.
Right now, you have monitor RGB being assumed for all of these images
you are saying *might* need to have some other assumed source.
No, I'm against using Monitor RGB and in favor of sRGB but I want some
users
to have the ability to tell the system not to use sRGB in *some* cases.
That makes it just as random as monitor RGB. You're thinking of an
option important to an individual user. I'm thinking of how the
operating system as a whole should work for as many people as possible.
The OS should cater itself to pretty much everyone, and if that's not
good enough for *some* cases, then that's what application settings are
for. I do not see it as Apple's responsibility to take up the slack for
lazy application developers.
I'm just a tad uncomfortable
with all untagged files being assumed to be sRGB and only sRGB without
some
method of changing that (for advanced users or advanced
administrators).
Why? In what instances specifically, with what applications being used?
And why don't you see the negative fallout of having such an option
apply to all untagged images on the system? Suddenly, web images would
use Adobe RGB for example. Then you might be inclined to expect a
friggin web browser to have a setting to ensure all web images are
sRGB. And then there would be applications that aren't web browsers but
use the internet (like Watson, Sherlock, and the increasingly blurred
lines between internet and desktop) to be written to explicitly set a
profile. This won't happen.
Advanced users, advanced administrators need competent advanced
applications with the proper functionality. If they don't have it, then
it's an application that's not being the good citizen.
No, it's totally WRONG. And given the decision to keep it that way or
force
sRGB as an assumption (with no back door to change this), I'll take
sRGB
forced upon untagged files any day of the week. I'd just like a tad
more
flexibility "just in case".
It's not worth a system level option for "just in case" - there needs
to be a *really* good reason for Apple to do this. I see it as applying
to maybe 1% of their total user base. That sounds like "3rd party
opportunity" to me.
So I'd like to see Apple "bail out" the
boneheads in Japan as a benefit to this OS we all know and love.
Otherwise,
I'm totally in agreement that these manufacturers are a bunch of
Bozo's.
It's a noble cause. However, my recommendation to Apple would be to
have an advanced option somewhere (maybe ColorSync Utility) that allows
the *Finder* to bring up an optional dialog before mounting
flashcards/memorysticks/cameras on the desktop. And that optional
dialog provides the option for all of those images to be mass tagged
with a particular profile selected in that dialog. So right off the
bat, before the storage media is even mounted, the Finder could tag all
images on that media. This eliminates assumption at the OS level (which
does not solve the lack of a tag anyway), and provides the
functionality you seem to be after since the camera vendors and app
developers are being lazy.
I think we need to think outside of the box of using OS level settings
to solve these kinds of problems. There's room for Apple to do cool
stuff like only Apple does, but asking them to bail out sloppy vendors
with a sledgehammer I'm convinced will cause far worse problems down
the road.
Chris Murphy
Color Remedies (TM)
www.colorremedies.com/realworldcolor
---------------------------------------------------------
Co-author "Real World Color Management"
Published by PeachPit Press (ISBN 0-201-77340-6)
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.