Re: untagged RGB data
Re: untagged RGB data
- Subject: Re: untagged RGB data
- From: Rick Gordon <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:35:00 -0800
I think the problem is that THEY (most likely) AREN'T GOING TO DO IT. They're going to continue to push their proprietary "solutions." And they're not the ones that have to eat it -- it's us -- and even more-so the general non-savvy user.
We need to have a fallback position that can take what they (don't) give us, make the the best sense of it, and provide users with the most likely correct option in the face of not really knowing.
Yes, plug away to create better workflows and more tagged images, but then don't fail to provide for the case where they are not happening.
A viable software solution needs to be robust, which (in part) means here that it will deal effectively with non-optimal data.
My 2 cents,
Rick Gordon
------------------
On 12/19/03 at 2:28 PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote in a message entitled
"Re: untagged RGB data":
>
I don't see why the rest of the world's workflows should be punished, or put at risk, because certain vendors can't get things right. The camera vendors have acted so irresponsibly when it comes to color management that I have no problem with making them eat responsibility with a shovel. Let's tell them to use JPEG2000 which requires embedded profiles, in the spec.
--
___________________________________________________
RICK GORDON
EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING
___________________________________________________
WWW:
http://www.shelterpub.com
_______________________________________________
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.