Let's say you have a XYZ LUT + matrix profile and you are using an application which ignores the LUT and relies on the matrix. It will be less correct, because LUT is more precise than matrix. So far, so good. My question is, will the resulting quality be comparable to a single curve + matrix profile? If not, what is the difference?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Does anybody know the answer? What I'm trying to figure out is if it's worth using a LUT+matrix instead of a curve+matrix if some images are rendered without using the LUT. In my understanding, the LUT and the curve are used for the gamma correction and the matrix for color profiling. In that case a curve+matrix would be preferable for day to day use, because a matrix on it's own won't suffice. But I don't know if this is really how it works.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
My question is, will the resulting quality be comparable to a single curve + matrix profile?
The curves + matrix part will be the same as a 3x curves + matrix profile (so potentially slightly more accurate than single curve + matrix).
In my understanding, the LUT and the curve are used for the gamma correction and the matrix for color profiling.
Not quite. Both are used for profiling (characterization) and model the measured device properties (tone response, color) to a certain degree of accuracy, with a LUT profile usually being more accurate. Then there are so-called video LUTs (also known as video card gamma tables), which are used for calibration to perform adjustment of tone response and gray balance and are not to be confused with the color LUT in a LUT profile.
If a LUT profile benefits you depends a bit on the applications you use. Do most or even all of them support LUT profiles (if they are truly ICC compatible they should, but unfortunately some browsers and also Windows photo viewer only support the curves + matrix part of such profiles)? Then I would go the LUT profile route.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The curves + matrix part will be the same as a 3x curves + matrix profile (so potentially slightly more accurate than single curve + matrix).
So what you're saying is that a LUT profile does have a curves profile built in? So if an application does not support the LUT part, it will be using curves? If that's the case, my question is answered. I know my photo editing software supports LUT profiles and I don't care too much what the rest of my software is using, as long as it's not way off.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
So what you're saying is that a LUT profile does have a curves profile built in?
This is true for XYZLUT profiles, yes. You have two choices, accurate matrix ("XYZLUT+MTX") or swapped matrix ("XYZLUT"). The purpose of the swapped matrix is that you'll clearly see if an application only uses the matrix part as the colors will be swapped.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Let's say you have a XYZ LUT + matrix profile and you are using an application which ignores the LUT and relies on the matrix. It will be less correct, because LUT is more precise than matrix. So far, so good. My question is, will the resulting quality be comparable to a single curve + matrix profile? If not, what is the difference?
Does anybody know the answer? What I'm trying to figure out is if it's worth using a LUT+matrix instead of a curve+matrix if some images are rendered without using the LUT. In my understanding, the LUT and the curve are used for the gamma correction and the matrix for color profiling. In that case a curve+matrix would be preferable for day to day use, because a matrix on it's own won't suffice. But I don't know if this is really how it works.
The curves + matrix part will be the same as a 3x curves + matrix profile (so potentially slightly more accurate than single curve + matrix).
Not quite. Both are used for profiling (characterization) and model the measured device properties (tone response, color) to a certain degree of accuracy, with a LUT profile usually being more accurate. Then there are so-called video LUTs (also known as video card gamma tables), which are used for calibration to perform adjustment of tone response and gray balance and are not to be confused with the color LUT in a LUT profile.
If a LUT profile benefits you depends a bit on the applications you use. Do most or even all of them support LUT profiles (if they are truly ICC compatible they should, but unfortunately some browsers and also Windows photo viewer only support the curves + matrix part of such profiles)? Then I would go the LUT profile route.
Thank you for response.
So what you're saying is that a LUT profile does have a curves profile built in? So if an application does not support the LUT part, it will be using curves? If that's the case, my question is answered. I know my photo editing software supports LUT profiles and I don't care too much what the rest of my software is using, as long as it's not way off.
This is true for XYZLUT profiles, yes. You have two choices, accurate matrix ("XYZLUT+MTX") or swapped matrix ("XYZLUT"). The purpose of the swapped matrix is that you'll clearly see if an application only uses the matrix part as the colors will be swapped.
OK, thanks, all clear now.