@Ben The ICC consortium is -I guess- basically ded as far as consumers are
concerned, because tagging files, workflow and stuff is certainly under
Regarding "poor" Mattias, I already gave him some with some very precise
Nothing is preventing Epson from designating an engineer to solve this
type of issue for their users.
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Per Nordlund <nordlund.per@xxxxxxxxx>
Very interesting but sadly not too much help for Mattias. There is still
possible to get very good results with Argyll CMS!
Den mån 30 juli 2018 17:10Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev:
On Jul 30, 2018, at 7:18 AM, edmund ronald <edmundronald@xxxxxxxxx>
Let's be clear: as of now there can be no "man page" for colormanagement because the behaviors just aren't logical.
And, alas, I don’t anticipate any solution short of AI. (Or, more
realistically, “smart” algorithms that “intelligently” “analyze” the
contents of your picture and “automatically” “enhance” the image for its
“best” color. We already see strong echoes of that going on with
consumer-level equipment. The automatic display white point adjustment with
modern iPads is quite impressive, for example....)
The current used-everywhere image formats all trace their heritage
directly back to the era of Atari-style computers, where there was a direct
pathway between the numerical value of the file and the voltage applied to
the phosphors of the CRT. And 0 meant no voltage and F or FF meant maximum
voltage. There was zero concern for anything critical for color management.
What chromaticity were the phosphors of this particular CRT? What was the
actual color of the display in its minimum- and maximum- voltage
conditions? What sort of gamma-like curve did the display have between? How
did that change when the user fiddled with the brightness and contrast
Those file formats remained logically the same when graphics-capable
printers came along, though the byte endian order might have gotten swapped
in the device driver somewhere — with 0 meaning maximum ink and 1 meaning
None of that even vaguely resembles the century-old mathematical
characterization of color that Munsel and others developed that would have
been perfectly within the capabilities of, if not the first generations of
graphics computers, certainly the first generation of color-capable
But, no. We’re _still_ stuck with image files that are barely one step
removed from raw device bit-fiddling, and you have to fight half the
daemons of Hell itself to work with color as actually perceived by humans.
And, sure. We already have the ability to store files as XYZ values or
the like. But who’s gonna get every single vendor to not only re-write code
to support it, but also do a not-miserable characterization of their
devices with reasonable built-in transforms for adaptation and the rest?
Even worse...which sales droid is going to convince consumers to pay for
What that means is that only color geeks who care about this sort of
thing will be able to do it, and it’s up to us to convince our own clients
that their images look better after we’ve worked our magic on them.