[argyllcms] Re: FW: Re: Question regarding gamut mapping for photographic images

  • From: Gerhard Fuernkranz <nospam456@xxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 22:39:49 +0200

Greg Sullivan schrieb:

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?

Just by definition. IMHO, Graeme can easily define this with clear conscience, *BECAUSE* it is so weakly defined. Any profile vendor is free to define and implement his particular artistic interpretation of perceptual and saturation intent.

There is also no requirement at all that the saturation intent gamut mapping must fully utilize the extemes of the destination gamut.


Other related posts: