Re: maclife.de
Re: maclife.de
- Subject: Re: maclife.de
- From: Uli Zappe <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 19:47:26 +0200
Am 03.09.2008 um 16:04 schrieb MARK SEGAL:
Re your first paragraph, yes it is.
I already stated that what I wrote should be "translated" to: "I would
not acknowledge someone working at Adobe as an authority on this
topic." If this solves your issue, then fine, and I'm sorry that I
used a form of expression that you feel is offensive (though I still
cannot understand why you do).
If it doesn't solve your issue, then we have indeed a factual
disagreement.
You can disagree with Andrew's argument without passing any judgment
on the relative competence of other people, regardless of how far
superior YOU think your approach to camera profiling is over theirs.
I can't if I'm presented with the argument that my test results are
meaningless since they are not in accordance with the stance of a
specific group of people, and that this is because these people are
"smart".
And BTW, this has nothing to do with the superiority of either one's
approach to camera profiling (since this is the very subject in
question, it would be circular).
And in any case, I don't think Andrew was putting up "authority"
arguments. I interpreted his comments to mean that while you have
one set of views about how this technology should be approached,
there are at least equally qualified other people working in or with
Adobe who have different ideas
If he had used that to express doubt whether my test results are 100%
correct, I'd agree. However, he said that these people had to be
"convinced" for my test results to have any merit. So he obviously
attached some power to them.
I really don't think whether or not you like Adobe and Microsoft
matters one iota in a discussion about the technical merits of one
profiling solution relative to another.
Of course it doesn't - it would be fatal if it did. I mentioned it to
explain a *social* refusal of mine - to accept one specific group of
people as an authority on a specific topic. This has nothing to do
with technical arguments. I, for one, would have been glad if Andrew
had stuck to this kind of arguments.
Finally, we should be clear about some terms here: "proprietary vs
standardized" is a false dichotomy, in the sense that - again for
reasons you may not like, we have examples of things that are both
proprietary and standardized because the owner of the intellectual
property has a large enough market share to both establish standards
and convince enough people to adopt them as such.
Maybe, but in the case at hand there clearly *has been* an adopted
standard (ICC profiles) already and Adobe set a proprietary format
against it.
From your POV, would you say PDF and ACR profiles have the same
"standard" status, or a different one?
Bye
Uli
________________________________________________________
Uli Zappe, Solmsstraße 5, D-65189 Wiesbaden, Germany
http://www.ritual.org
Fon: +49-700-ULIZAPPE
Fax: +49-700-ZAPPEFAX
________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
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