Re: untagged RGB data
Re: untagged RGB data
- Subject: Re: untagged RGB data
- From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:21:16 -0700
On Dec 22, 2003, at 10:16 AM, bruce fraser wrote:
At 1:56 AM -0500 12/22/03, Roberto Michelena wrote:
Hallelujah!
Besides the fact that CPUs are getting faster all the time, it's true
that
color matching via ICC profiles is a heavy task.
Photoshop has been matching to the display is something meaninglessly
close to real time for 5 years, and doing so on big files, not just on
little JPEGs.
IE has done color-matching to the display for almost as long. I just
don't buy the performance argument, particularly when we're talking
about matrix transforms from assumed sRGB to monitor RGB. It just
doesn't take that long.
I don't understand either. Maybe the problem is that every single
widget, pulldown menu, application icon, and dock icon getting color
managed is what would slow it down. But it's not like they need a high
quality 16-bit precise conversion. Send them through 8-bits. I would
think the processing power needed to rasterize a vector based language
on the fly would be a lot higher.
I still think it would have made more sense to get "poor man's" color
management by having deprecated gamma 1.8 and going with 2.2. That
would have given Mac OS X users something loosely approximating sRGB,
insofar as the randomly selected Windows machine loosely approximates
sRGB. There would have been no performance hit for that.
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.