• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Microsoft's color-management claims
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Microsoft's color-management claims


  • Subject: Re: Microsoft's color-management claims
  • From: Graeme Gill <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 17:12:33 +1000

Robin Myers wrote:

As the inventor of the algorithms that formed the basis for ColorSync 1, I can assure you that the algorithms were matrix based and worked extremely well on subtractive printers. In fact, for in gamut colors, I was able to achieve very accurate colorimetric matches (within the measurement error of my spectrometers and the printer tolerance). All the calculations were performed with XYZ data. The algorithms also handled seven colorant printers, and had a mechanism for gamut mapping and primary adjustments such as adjusting the yellow colorant so there would be no scum dots in the pure yellows (at the expense of some colorimetric accuracy). The final ColorSync 1 release unfortunately did not have these features and was restricted to a 4 colorant printer model only.

I suspect this depends on the definition of "matrix". My use of "matrix" was in the ICC, 3x3 sense. If you expand the definition to include the type of colorant combination matrix used for Neugenbauer type models, then I have no doubt that acceptable to very good printer models are possible. That sort of thing doesn't plug into an ICC "Matrix" profile though (although it could be fitted into an XYZ Lut profile I suspect), and in my experience the approach works well on some types of printing systems, and poorly on others, while LUT based models work more broadly.

If you are talking about 3x3 matrix models, then all I can say is that
I haven't stumbled across many printing systems that seem to work well
with such an approach. Even many CRT's that I've characterized have been
a poor fit to 3x3 matrices, in spite of them being additive devices !

When the ICC was formed it was decided not to unveil the algorithms I invented but to work with the ICC to develop a LUT system. I do not believe that the reason cited above was the determining factor for the ICC using LUTs. More likely a LUT system was chosen because LUTs were well understood by the members of the ICC and they already had functioning LUT color matching solutions they could quickly convert to use ICC based profiles. LUTs also allow for very non-linear behavior to be encapsulated easily.

Well, of course I was not privy to the ICC's deliberations, so my comments are naturally speculation based on my experience comparing ICC Matrix profiles, Neugenbauer type models, and LUT based models. That "LUTs also allow for very non-linear behaviour to be encapsulated easily" was precisely the type of argument I was making.

Graeme Gill.



_______________________________________________
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: NEC SpectraView II (From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Microsoft's color-management claims (From: Tim Vitale <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Microsoft's color-management claims (From: Graeme Gill <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Microsoft's color-management claims (From: Robin Myers <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Poll: "Old" G4 with Tiger & CS2 installed : How should it work?
  • Next by Date: Re: Poll: "Old" G4 with Tiger & CS2 installed : How should it work?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft's color-management claims
  • Next by thread: RE: NEC SpectraView II
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread