Alexey Blinov wrote: > They say they set wtpt=D50 to eliminate color cast when absolute colorimetric > intent is used. To > me it's vice versa: it introduces a yellow cast, when I set it as (sRGB) > profile in GIMP. Some people at the ICC have a strange point of view with respect to absolute colorimetric and display profiles. From past discussions it appears that the move to set display profiles wtpt at D50 (flying in the face of those millions of sRGB and Adobe RGB profiles out there) was motivated partly by one sort of soft proofing scenario - soft proofing the difference between hard copy paper white and illuminant white, but displaying it relative colorimetrically on a display. Rather than punting this to the CMM where it belongs (ie., to get a mixed absolute + relative colorimetric transform, specify it in the CMM that way), they altered the display profile to make absolute colorimetric == relative colorimetric so that a dumb CMM would give that result when told to use absolute colorimetric. This leaves anyone wanting an actual soft proof out of luck if they are stuck with the normal selection of intents. > {r,g,b}XYZ tag values (colorants) from those profiles coincide with those > from Argyll's sRGB > profile. However, iccgamut+viewgam show whitepoints around D50 and D65 > correspondingly for > color.org and argyll profiles. So it looks like color.org assumes a transform > using chad, making > white point D65->D50. Why? It's hard to fathom, and fundamentally wrong. A profile is meant to represent the characteristics of the device. For print, the illuminant is not part of the device but can be chosen independently, so it is removed from the profile by using a standard D50 illuminant or chad tag if some other illuminant was used for measurement. In contrast a display's "illuminant" is fundamentally part of the display, and therefore the wtpt should reflect the actual media white point. This madness is now standardised in V4 :-( Graeme Gill.