Thread: [Lcms-user] softproof without proofing profile
An ICC-based CMM for color management
Brought to you by:
mm2
From: Kai-Uwe B. <ku...@gm...> - 2006-10-19 05:31:10
|
Hello, found that CinePaint crashes on softproofing without proofing profile. Beside this strangeness in the gui, lcms should perform a gamut check without proofing profile? An other use case is, when I create a profile chain including abstract profiles and want to proof on a later stage with a existing proof profile. Currently I'd need to exclude the softproof flag first and later reintruduce it to not crash. In cmsxform.c:~1519 lcms could check for the existence of the proofing profile and possibly skip the gamut check: if (p -> dwOriginalFlags & cmsFLAGS_GAMUTCHECK && p -> PreviewProfile) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ { GamutCheck = _cmsPrecalculateGamutCheck((cmsHTRANSFORM) p); } kind regards Kai-Uwe Behrmann + development for color management + imaging / panoramas + email: ku...@gm... + http://www.behrmann.name |
From: Gerhard F. <nos...@gm...> - 2006-10-19 18:42:10
|
Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote: > Hello, > > found that CinePaint crashes on softproofing without proofing profile. > Beside this strangeness in the gui, lcms should perform a gamut check > without proofing profile? IMO a gamut check may also make sense for a "normal" (non-proofing) transformation from a source to a destination profile. In this case I think I would expect that it marks all the pixels which are out of gamut on the destination device. Regards, Gerhard > An other use case is, when I create a profile chain including abstract > profiles and want to proof on a later stage with a existing proof profile. > Currently I'd need to exclude the softproof flag first and later > reintruduce it to not crash. > > In cmsxform.c:~1519 lcms could check for the existence of the proofing > profile and possibly skip the gamut check: > if (p -> dwOriginalFlags & cmsFLAGS_GAMUTCHECK && > p -> PreviewProfile) > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > { > GamutCheck = _cmsPrecalculateGamutCheck((cmsHTRANSFORM) p); > } |
From: Kai-Uwe B. <ku...@gm...> - 2006-10-19 20:11:33
|
Am 19.10.06, 20:41 +0200 schrieb Gerhard Fuernkranz: > Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote: > > Hello, > > > > found that CinePaint crashes on softproofing without proofing profile. > > Beside this strangeness in the gui, lcms should perform a gamut check > > without proofing profile? > > IMO a gamut check may also make sense for a "normal" (non-proofing) > transformation from a source to a destination profile. In this case I > think I would expect that it marks all the pixels which are out of gamut > on the destination device. > > Regards, > Gerhard You could fill the source profile into the proofing profile. This is somewhat difficult to you but more simple to understand for most users? What says CS? regards Kai-Uwe Behrmann + development for color management + imaging / panoramas + email: ku...@gm... + http://www.behrmann.name |
From: Gerhard F. <nos...@gm...> - 2006-10-19 21:01:31
|
Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote: > Am 19.10.06, 20:41 +0200 schrieb Gerhard Fuernkranz: > >> Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> found that CinePaint crashes on softproofing without proofing profile. >>> Beside this strangeness in the gui, lcms should perform a gamut check >>> without proofing profile? >>> >> IMO a gamut check may also make sense for a "normal" (non-proofing) >> transformation from a source to a destination profile.In this case I >> think I would expect that it marks all the pixels which are out of gamut >> on the destination device. >> >> Regards, >> Gerhard >> > > You could fill the source profile into the proofing profile. Actually not the source, but the destination profile. Sure that's possible, but it makes a simpe source -> destination transformation more complex (i.e. source profile -> proofing profile -> destination profile, where proofing profile == destination profile), and the accuracy may suffer due to the additional roundtrip (A2B and B2A) done for the destination profile, when it acts as proofing profile as well. Regards, Gerhard > This is somewhat difficult to you but more simple to understand for most users? > What says CS? > > regards > Kai-Uwe Behrmann |