Re: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
Re: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
- Subject: Re: Photoshop CS4 DeviceLink CMM Engine
- From: Steve Upton <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:48:19 -0700
At 12:40 PM -0700 4/28/09, Marco Ugolini wrote:
>In a message dated 4/28/09 12:14 PM, Steve Upton wrote:
>
> >
>> Proprietary solutions which combine a profile that contains private tags with
>> a CMM / workflow tool that can use those tags is the only solution available
>> today.
>
>So, the only way for Photoshop to be able to assign a specific destination
>profile after a DVL conversion would be after a change in the spec allows
>for a destination profile tag -- and only if the DVL used in the conversion
>does indeed contain such a tag, properly filled. Correct?
well, yes. I suppose there are other ways as well. You could select a profile when selecting the device link, etc, etc. But that's the only way that would work with all compliant profiles.
> > As far as I see it Adobe did about as much as they could with link transforms
>> that stay in the same color model.
>
>One can only hope that future versions of Photoshop will allow for DVL
>conversions *across* color modes.
>
>> I would have liked to have seen the ability to change color models as well
>> but then there would be a bunch of complaints about the destination space
>> in that case.
>
>To be fair, it's a somewhat fine point to comprehend for the non-seasoned
>user of imaging technologies.
true but I think the use of device links weeds most of them out. Though it shouldn't have to.
> > It seems that the first place to start is to help the ICC amend the spec to
>> include better meta data in the device link profiles themselves. Then we can
>> take the "fight" to Adobe (which I would expect to be unnecessary as Adobe
>> would probably be happy to support something that was in the ICC spec.)
>
>Makes sense, but, even if the ICC should decide to modify the spec, it will
>take time -- probably quite a bit of time -- to get done, judging from the
>pace of past innovations.
yep. The double-edged sword of standards. You don't want them to change quickly unless you want them to change quickly.
> > The thing I think is strangest about all of this is that the discussions are
>> only coming up NOW, much more than a decade after the ICC spec supported link
>> profiles.
>
>Strange, yes, but up to this point DVLs have been used by a very small
>sector of imaging professionals, and now that Photoshop is in the DVL game,
>things may be just starting to get into high heat after a long low simmer.
yeah. Two of the black sheep of the ICC family finally get their shot.
Then there's only one remaining, the NCP profile. But lots more work needs to be done on them too.
regards,
Steve
--
_______________________________________________
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