This may be of interest (from http://photo.net/learn/digital-photography- workflow/color-management/color-settings/ )
"For example, if you use Lightroom or Aperture for processing your camera raw files, you don’t need to select a general editing space as you do with Photoshop. Instead, you select the appropriate print profile during the printing process, a different editing space when exporting photos for the Web or inclusion in a printed piece and still another ICC profile when compositing photos in Photoshop. This adds flexibility to your workflow. As camera raw processing and the selective editing capabilities of raw processors progresses, you may only have to choose an ICC profile in the export and printing process." Cheers, Kevin On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 14:19:16 Torsten Bronger opined: > Hallöchen! > > Max Killer writes: > > > [...] > > > > Regarding the histogram, it is correct that it changes with your > > display profile. You are working in a defined colorspace if you > > profiled your monitor and calibrated it correctly. What you see is > > the representation of this colorspace. The advantage of working > > with darktable and RAW files is that they have _no_ colorspace to > > begin with. > > I don't consider this an advantage. My ideal workflow would be: > > 1. Load a RAW in a given calibrated colour space and convert it into > a universal colour space (Lab, XYZ, etc) as early as possible. > > 2. Apply all the transformations (i.e. what darktable's modules do), > e.g. gradation curves, noise reduction, sharpening, etc. > > 3. Output into a given colour space, e.g. sRGB. > > This implies that all info modules (colour picker, histogram) also > refer to the universal colour space of (2), or to a *well-defined* > subspace like sRGB. > > > So everything you do you do in the working colorspace of your > > monitor, which is the greatest colorspace you can _see_. The > > histogram is a representation of this. A histogram is not absolute > > for a picture without a color profile. You could "fix" the > > histogram by setting everything to "adobe sRGB", for example, but > > this would limit your working colorspace. > > I do image editing work in darktable with a certain result. Among > other things, I look at the histogram for this, and edit according > to what I see there. If the histogram changes just by switching to > another monitor, my result image would change. For example, if I > own a cheap monitor, at least I'd like to have tools that tell me > how the real colour distribution is. > > In other words: The image editing program should make the influence > of the hardware as little as possible. > > > The colorspace of the picture is only relevant for export, > > Possibly I don't understand you correctly here, but without knowing > the colour space of the input image file, darktable cannot work > properly. > > > there you decide which colorspace the image should have > > (e.g. sRGB) and darktable converts the data from the working > > colorspace to the output profile. > > Yes, the image editing program should take the output profile take > into account e.g. mark colours that cannot be printed. But the > *display* profile should not change anything in the diagrams and > figures. > > Tschö, > Torsten. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_jan _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
