edmund ronald wrote:
I don' know if this is relevant here, but I'm highly sceptical of using Argyll to achieve adaptive gamut compression. When I tried that, prints got worse rather than better. Of course I'm not very knowledgable about this computer stuff although I trust my eyes - but maybe my friend Klaus has an opinion?
... well -- gamut compression is always a dirty business ;-)joking aside: While the adaptive gamut mapping approach of ArgyllCMS is dead right IMHO, there were definitely issues in argyll 1.0.3 (GaMapICC 0.1), frequently noticeable in saturated reds.
While Graeme seeks for flaws in the gamut mapping /algorithms/ (If I got his last post right), I spent quite some time in optimizing the gamut mapping /parameters/ (file gammap.c of the V1.1.0_Beta snapshot) ... and at least /I/ am quite satisfied with the result ;-) -- see my updated page <http://digitalproof.info/gamapicc/examples.html>
If you like to test GaMapICC in its current state, you can download it from <http://digitalproof.info/gamapicc/GaMapICC0.3b.zip>.
Please note that this is no complete release yet: it's Intel-only and contains only the essential files (no growl, no source code, no documentation). See also <http://digitalproof.info/gamapicc/> and feel free to contact me if there are any further questions.
Klaus
