Re: ICC v4
Re: ICC v4
- Subject: Re: ICC v4
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:28:54 -0800
In a message dated Thu, Nov 17, 2005 10:00 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> That's a big part of the problem with ICC v2 is that the destination profile's
> gamut compression is pre-baked at the time it's built, rather than being
> dynamically computed based on the gamut of the source profile.
I want to make sure I understand this correctly, and that the above
statement is not interpreted to mean what it doesn't say.
This is how I read it:
The gamut "compression dynamics" are currently set in stone inside profiles,
one-size-fits-all style, whereas, ideally, superior results would come from
a compression procedure established *at conversion time* to tailor the
destination space for each given source image's gamut. (Does this mean
conversion techniques that better respond to source image characteristics
such as "low-key", or lack of very dark or light colors?)
Also, my understanding is that *the destination gamut itself*, say for a
given paper/printer/ink combination or for a scanner, would *not* be
dynamic, since I assume that a given device's color gamut is more or less a
fixed entity, with possibly only minor variations.
Am I reading this correctly?
Thank you.
--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
References: | |
| >Re: ICC v4 (From: Rich Apollo <email@hidden>) |