Re: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
Re: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
- Subject: Re: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
- From: Joseph Yates <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:26:53 -1000
- Thread-topic: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
As Rolf pointed out in an earlier post - the DeviceLink CMM comes from the
BasICColor Demon program - which I had installed (and forgotten about) in
CS4.
That's an excellent question Marc. You are right - my understanding now also
is that the deviceLink should - as you put - contain all the color pieces
required to make the transform from device to device color space.
The reason I ask is that - at least on my hardware calibrated Eizo monitor -
when selecting a different CMM in Photoshop's Convert to Profile Advanced
(Conversion Options) I see distinct changes in the preview - mostly
highlight areas.
No difference when choosing either Adobe (ACS) or Adobe CMM
But a definite difference between the Adobe's and Apple CMM or BasICColors
CMM
Hence my original query about the option to choose a different CMM during a
Photoshop devicelink conversion.
If you are correct also about the benefit of not having to choose the
parameters of the transform - such as rendering intent - then even though
Adobe does include these "options" - changing these - say from Absolute to
Relative - will have no effect on the actual transform correct?
Regards,
Joseph Yates | Pacifica Island Art | Maui, Hawaii
> I think the right answer to this question is:
>
> Should it matter? An ICC link transform is a "bundled transform". In
> other words, the transform contains all of the color pieces (input
> space, output space, rendering) required to make a digital color
> transformation from one color space to another. The engine that
> applies the link should be insignificant because all of the numbers
> were crunched when the link was made, not when the link is applied (as
> opposed to standard input/output transforms, where the CMM needs to do
> some heavy lifting "on the fly").
>
> I suspect that, if there was a big difference in CMMs (which...I'm not
> sure there is these days), then you might see it in the link-building
> process. This is trick-answer as well because I'm not sure which (if
> any) link profile-building softwares give you a choice in which CMM
> you can use to build a link. Chances are, the CMM that a software uses
> is pre-selected by the software manufacturer and then hard-coded.
>
> Last comment is: hopefully, none of this matters because.... one of
> the 2 main benefits of a link is that YOU DON'T NEED TO THINK about
> all the parameters of a transform (including "Which CMM?" and "Which
> rendering intent?"). It's all baked in. This ensures that you get
> consistent color transformation by whatever means the link is applied.
> The other benefit, or couRse, are the extra goodies you get by knowing
> the input and output space when you build the transform (e.g. special
> handling of pure colors, secondary colors, entire channels, ink
> savings, black-point compensation, etc...)
>
> Hope this helps,
> Marc
> --
> Marc Levine
> email@hidden
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> .com
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
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