[argyllcms] Re: another X error
- From: Frédéric <frederic.mantegazza@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 16:41:25 +0200
On Sunday 13 August 2006 16:19, Graeme Gill wrote:
> What I want is a way of detecting whether TwinView or MergeFB is
> running, to handle the situation more elegantly.
Yes, I agree.
> > And as I said before, the common LUT for both screen is this is not a
> > problem for me.
>
> It may not be, but I'm not sure it's a good idea to fool people in
> general into believing that calibration is working for each screen,
> when in fact it is not. The conclusion to all this might be simply
> to say that "if you want to run color managed screens under X11,
> don't use TwinView or MergeFB".
Well, color calibration is a bit tricky; I think people using Argyll are
prudent, and these kind of restriction should not be a problem. More and
more people are using dual-screen config, and as ATI/NVidia are the last
video cards manufacturers, MergedFB/TwinView configs will be more and more
common.
Opposite to GUI-tools, people using command-line tools must read carefully
the manual; if the restriction above is clearly defined, this is not a
problem. I'm amazed of all people thinking that their screen is correctly
calibrated, because they used tools like Colorvision, where you have a
nice wizard. But then, you discover that they are using the wrong
colorspace in Photoshop, or they have more than one color engine running!
One more thing: I don't think that X is now able to dynamically tell to
running applications what profile they have to use, depending on what
screen these applications are displayed. So, even if you have a LUT loaded
for each screen, this is not enough. Am I wrong?
--
Frédéric
http://www.gbiloba.org
Other related posts:
