Greg Sullivan wrote:
Why is it that in Argyll, that the "Enhanced Saturation" intent is referred to also as "ICC Saturation", when the ICC specification (V4.2) says:
"6.2.5 Saturation intent The exact gamut mapping of the saturation intent is vendor specific and involves compromises such as trading off preservation of hue in order to preserve the vividness of pure colours."
I.e, how can Argyll refer to this as being "ICC", when this intent is so
poorly defined?
Because this best meets the commercial expectation of what Saturation intent is meant to achieve, I've made this the default gamut mapping mode for generating the saturation table when creating an icc profile, hence it's the "ICC Saturation" intent (ie. you are misinterpreting the label if you think this has any official meaning.)
By "meets the commercial expectation" I mean that a real paying customer found this behaviour satisfactory in reproducing office "bright and colorful" type documents on their printing engines.
Graeme Gill.
