Elle Stone (ellest...@ninedegreesbelow.com) wrote:
> On 10/17/2014 06:39 AM, Simon Budig wrote:
> >Elle Stone (ellest...@ninedegreesbelow.com) wrote:
> >>//begin quote from http://color.org/DevCon/devcon14.xalter
> >>
> >>While this fixed PCS is capable of delivering unambiguous color transforms,
> >>it cannot support the increasing demand for spectrally-based reproduction.
> >[...]
> >>Tying GIMP to "sRGB as PCS" is a dead-end move.
> >
> >If you take "spectrally based reproduction" as an argument against "sRGB
> >as PCS" you should be at least be so fair to also mention that *any* RGB
> >based image editing is bound to fail for this.
>
> In point of fact, I've already said thist. But I'm happy to say it again.
> RGB data is not spectral data.
I know. Which is why your previous mail could have had the very same
text and the following sentence as the conclusion:
"Tying GIMP to RGB based editing is a dead-end move."
Which is exactly the dead end you have been advocating a lot in the
recent discussion.
Bye,
Simon
--
si...@budig.de http://simon.budig.de/
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
