On Sunday 08 June 2003 01:46 pm, Marco Wessel wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Helvetix Victorinox wrote: > > This may be entirely my deficiency, but I am unclear on the general > > usefulness of having a native CMYK implementation. On one hand I > > understand that there is a perceived value of working with the four > > values, on the other hand I think we expose too much of the underlying > > guts of the colour implemetation and gamuts to the poor user already. > > > > [snip]
The color model used in printing is CMYK. So Gimp, like Photoshop, should manipulate and save colors in that model. When that happens the world of Gimp becomes much broader. True, one can save as a png and then use an external program to convert, but that is clumsy. Native CMYK also means that we are a bit closer to WYSWYG as far as printing is concerned. At least the gamut will be correct. So this poor user wants native CMYK. That is the biggest single deficiency in Gimp of today. -- John Culleton Able Typesetters & Indexers http://wexfordpress.com ____________________________________________________________ Free 20MB Web Site Hosting and Personalized E-mail Service! Get It Now At Doteasy.com http://www.doteasy.com/et/ _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
