Re: Defining what you want
Re: Defining what you want
- Subject: Re: Defining what you want
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:38:25 -0600
on 6/20/04 4:29 PM, Matt Deatherage wrote:
>
If I were
>
writing a ColorSync manual, I'd have already decided to always say
>
"sRGB color space" or "sRGB profile" to make it clearer what function
>
I'm talking about.
sRGB is a colorspace and it can be described to the CMS using a profile (the
CMS needs profiles which is the basis of this discussion).
I agree, the terminology is totally confusing for new users. Let's see, I
can embed, tag and Assign profiles to documents...
>
Yeah, I fail to see how renaming it " 'Generic RGB' (whatever that's
>
supposed to be" is helpful.
I'm not slamming the name but the choice of profiles here. I don't really
know what Generic RGB is supposed to be yet Apple provides a profile in all
OSX systems that it is supposed to (but apparently doesn't) use for untagged
documents. On the other hand, sRGB is really the best generic profile out
there since so many devices funnel their color into or expect something
close to sRGB. That again is the crux of this argument. This isn't to say we
can guarantee by any stretch of the imagination that any untagged file you
get will appear OK when assigned sRGB buy your chances are best that it
will.
>
I'm guessing that the answer to the real question is "if an image has
>
no embedded source profile, embed the one specified in the ColorSync
>
Preferences when you write it to disk." If that's not the answer, then
>
replace "the one specified in the ColorSync Preferences" with the right
>
answer.
The ColorSync preferences as far as I'm concerted totally screwed up based
upon what they tell me they do. So let's not even go there. OK, they tell me
that what I load for RGB is what is used as an assumption for untagged RGB
files which isn't the case and John tells me that the Generic RGB file is
what's used for untagged files which again doesn't appear to be the case. So
there are a multitude of issues going on here one of which is what RGB
profile and color space should be used when untagged images are used (the
consensus from everyone outside of Apple appears to be sRGB).
>
I'm a small programmer. I'm writing Preview, or SimpleImage, or
>
GraphicConverter, or Snapz Pro. If I ask about color matching, and the
>
answer I get is "spend two weeks researching Photoshop 5 and later
>
because it's good," I'm done
Love SnapPro, wish it did support profiles (cause I have to assign a
stinking profile to every screen dump it produces). Anyway, you can ask the
user or you can tell the user and between the two, I'm not sure what else
you can do. In the case of SnapPro, it just produces an untagged file which
I have to open in Photoshop and upon opening, I assign the profile (since
the profile option is sticky, I only have to do this once and then instantly
click on the Enter key which tells Photoshop to Assign the profile I
originally asked for every time I open a screen dump). In theory, the
application could have a preference and ask me "Tag image with what
profile?" in a popup menu, then just embed that in all the captures. You'd
want an option not to embed anything because I can certainly see situations
where users don't want the extra data nor need it (images are going to the
web).
>
If you can't
>
give me a better answer than "Imitate what Photoshop does," it's not
>
going to happen. And _that_ is why so many programs completely ignore
>
color management.
That's fine but if you want to work with images and you want a user to be
able to share those images with other users on other systems and those users
are supposed to see the same color appearance, you're going to have to do
something with regard to color management. Otherwise you're going to have an
application that acts like most web browsers. I'm OK with that if you and
your customers are.
>
As far as I can tell, the APIs for this stuff are not complicated at all; any
>
developer can use an embedded profile or embed one without so much as a blink.
The issue isn't embedding profiles. The issue is what to do with images that
have no embedded profile. IF you build an application that produces untagged
images, then everyone down the road that opens those images isn't going to
see the numbers as intended.
>
I'm not getting into the sRGB vs. Generic RGB debate; I'm just saying there
>
needs to be a short, sweet answer to the question.
Here it is. Embed the correct profile in all the images you create but give
the user the option not to (default is embed!!!). Assume that any untagged
images your application opens is assuming sRGB. Maybe give the user the
option to alter that since we can't guarantee that every untagged image is
sRGB but as a default, it makes the most sense. Use the display profile as a
mechanism for previewing the numbers WITH the embedded (or assumed) profile
only.
>
If you expect every application to include full profile choices and a dialog
>
box and all that, then you need to tell Apple to put an API for that into the
>
system,
Look, I'd be happy if they would just FIX the text in the ColorSync
preferences and occasionally produce some documentation that wasn't a sales
vehicle but rather an information vehicle.
>
You think the definitions of "display profile" and "color space" will
>
change in Tiger?
I have no idea, they are not telling me anything despite the post that we so
called experts are supposed to be disseminating information to the color
management user community.
Andrew Rodney
http://digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
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.