Re: [Gimp-developer] Adding ability to reverse curves dialog

2010-03-10 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi,

On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 16:47 -0500, Jay Smith wrote:

 The general arguments you raise such as code harder to maintain and
 interface more complex are all perfectly legitimate and could be said
 of virtually any program change.  However, they are not a shield from
 change.  Rather, they are a filter which must be passed as part of a
 cost/benefit analysis.

Indeed, that is exactly what they are. And that's why you need to give
us reasons other than I would like that feature because it would be
useful for me. Otherwise this change has nothing but costs and will be
rejected.

 BUT... that little double-arrow thingy at the bottom of the curves
 graph reverses black/white positions.

Sorry, but the fact that another program has a toggle button for this is
not an argument for adding such a toggle button to GIMP. So is there any
work-flow or use-case for which it would be beneficial to reverse the
direction?


Sven


___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP distributing sRGB profiles: license issues?

2010-03-10 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi,

On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 22:22 -0500, Jay Smith wrote:

 ... So what I want to understand is .
 
 - In Gimp, I understand that an image without an embedded color space is
 treated as if it had an embedded sRGB color space.

Not completely. It is assumed to be in sRGB. That assumption means that
the display code (with color management enabled) will use the sRGB
built-in color profile to interpret the image data. The image still does
not have a profile attached and that makes a difference when it is
saved. What exactly happens when it is saved depends on the file format
you are saving to.

 - BUT, when that image (without a previously embedded color space) is
 edited and saved in Gimp, is there any embedding or assigning or
 tagging of color space being done it the user does not explicitly
 assign a color space?

As said above, this depends on the implementation of the file export
plug-in. IIRC pretty much all file plug-ins will not tag or embed
anything if the image does not have a color profile attached. The PNG
plug-in however will tag the image with an sRGB tag. It does not embed a
color profile, it just sets a flag saying that the image should be
interpreted as sRGB. This particular behavior of the PNG plug-in is
debatable and could be considered a bug.

 - And do the words embedding or assigning or tagging mean the same
 thing in this context?

No, but that should have become evident already.


Sven


___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP distributing sRGB profiles: license issues?

2010-03-10 Thread Sven Neumann
On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 09:14 +0100, Sven Neumann wrote:

  - And do the words embedding or assigning or tagging mean the same
  thing in this context?
 
 No, but that should have become evident already.

Let me try to define the terms nevertheless. Perhaps that helps to clear
up some of the confusion around this topic.

We speak about an embedded color profile in the context of an image
file. The file contains a color profile and this profile defines how it
should be interpreted. Not all file formats actually support this.

We speak about assigning a color profile in the sense of assigning the
icc-profile parasite to an image object in GIMP. This is what a file
load plug-in will typically do. If it finds an embedded color profile in
the image file, it will create an icc-profile parasite from that
profile and attach it to the image. This attached profile will be used
by the display code to correctly display the image and when that image
is exported, the file save plug-in may embed the attached profile in the
file that it creates.

Some file formats, such as PNG for example, allow to tag the file to be
in a particular well-known color space. The color profile is not
embedded then, it is assumed to be well-defined. Instead of distributing
the profile with the image file, there is just a flag saying this data
should be interpreted as sRGB.


Sven


___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] Adding ability to reverse curves dialog

2010-03-10 Thread jcupitt
On 10 March 2010 08:04, Sven Neumann s...@gimp.org wrote:
 BUT... that little double-arrow thingy at the bottom of the curves
 graph reverses black/white positions.

 Sorry, but the fact that another program has a toggle button for this is
 not an argument for adding such a toggle button to GIMP. So is there any
 work-flow or use-case for which it would be beneficial to reverse the
 direction?

How about editing in CMYK space, where higher numbers mean greater ink
density? Perhaps this is why Photoshop has this 'flip' feature.

Of course GIMP is luminance only for now (higher numbers mean more
light, not more ink) but this could change in the next few versions.

John
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] Adding ability to reverse curves dialog

2010-03-10 Thread Martin Nordholts
2010/3/10  jcup...@gmail.com:
 On 10 March 2010 08:04, Sven Neumann s...@gimp.org wrote:
 Sorry, but the fact that another program has a toggle button for this is
 not an argument for adding such a toggle button to GIMP. So is there any
 work-flow or use-case for which it would be beneficial to reverse the
 direction?

 How about editing in CMYK space, where higher numbers mean greater ink
 density? Perhaps this is why Photoshop has this 'flip' feature.

Good point, but in this case GIMP can do the necessary invert and flip
for the user, no need for a toggle for that.

 / Martin
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP distributing sRGB profiles: license issues?

2010-03-10 Thread Jason Simanek

On 03/10/2010 02:37 AM, Sven Neumann wrote:
 Some file formats, such as PNG for example, allow to tag the file to be
 in a particular well-known color space. The color profile is not
 embedded then, it is assumed to be well-defined. Instead of distributing
 the profile with the image file, there is just a flag saying this data
 should be interpreted as sRGB.

Ah, so the color problems I am having with images created by Gimp are 
due to the PNG files being 'tagged' as sRGB. The color profile isn't 
embedded to the image, it's just specified and, since it's a well known 
color profile, any program that attempts to display the image will do so 
as though the PNG had an embedded sRGB profile. Thanks for pointing that 
out.

To summarize:
Tagging is great because it specifies a color profile without increasing 
the image file size. Assuming that the destination system applies the 
correct profile.

Embedding is great because you have greater flexibility for an endless 
variety of custom color profiles.

The end result of the two is the same though: the image will be color 
managed.

--

As for gballard's recommendation for not including color profiles in web 
images: He's only saying that because his ultimate goal is color 
consistency across all platforms/browsers.

I, as a professional web designer, think he's right when it comes to 
page element images that are intended to match colors defined in HTML or 
CSS. Otherwise all of the Safari users that visit your site are going to 
doubt your design capabilities. For photographs I think it's fine to 
include color profiles. Browsers that don't color manage are going to 
show you the same limited gamut either way, but browsers that DO color 
manage will display an enhanced image with a wider gamut of colors. 
Progressive enhancement.

You do have to also keep in mind that profiled/tagged sRGB and 
un-profiled/un-tagged RGB images will display differently in color 
managed browsers/environments. The assumption that Gimp currently makes 
(for historical reasons, explained by Sven previously) about 'assigning 
sRGB color profile' being the same as 'having no color profile' is 
misleading.

-Jason Simanek
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP distributing sRGB profiles: license issues?

2010-03-10 Thread Jay Smith
On 03/10/2010 09:40 AM, Jason Simanek wrote:
 On 03/10/2010 02:37 AM, Sven Neumann wrote:
 Some file formats, such as PNG for example, allow to tag the file to be
 in a particular well-known color space. The color profile is not
 embedded then, it is assumed to be well-defined. Instead of distributing
 the profile with the image file, there is just a flag saying this data
 should be interpreted as sRGB.
 
 Ah, so the color problems I am having with images created by Gimp are 
 due to the PNG files being 'tagged' as sRGB. The color profile isn't 
 embedded to the image, it's just specified and, since it's a well known 
 color profile, any program that attempts to display the image will do so 
 as though the PNG had an embedded sRGB profile. Thanks for pointing that 
 out.
 
 To summarize:
 Tagging is great because it specifies a color profile without increasing 
 the image file size. Assuming that the destination system applies the 
 correct profile.
 
 Embedding is great because you have greater flexibility for an endless 
 variety of custom color profiles.
 
 The end result of the two is the same though: the image will be color 
 managed.
 
 --
 
 As for gballard's recommendation for not including color profiles in web 
 images: He's only saying that because his ultimate goal is color 
 consistency across all platforms/browsers.
 
 I, as a professional web designer, think he's right when it comes to 
 page element images that are intended to match colors defined in HTML or 
 CSS. Otherwise all of the Safari users that visit your site are going to 
 doubt your design capabilities. For photographs I think it's fine to 
 include color profiles. Browsers that don't color manage are going to 
 show you the same limited gamut either way, but browsers that DO color 
 manage will display an enhanced image with a wider gamut of colors. 
 Progressive enhancement.
 
 You do have to also keep in mind that profiled/tagged sRGB and 
 un-profiled/un-tagged RGB images will display differently in color 
 managed browsers/environments. The assumption that Gimp currently makes 
 (for historical reasons, explained by Sven previously) about 'assigning 
 sRGB color profile' being the same as 'having no color profile' is 
 misleading.
 
 -Jason Simanek

Jason,

You are going to hate this suggestion, but as long as certain browsers
are causing you a problem, you may have to do browser sniffing and
serve those users different content.  In other words, different image
files get called for different browsers.  Of course, everything about
that is wrong, but it solves your problem.

Jay

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP distributing sRGB profiles: license issues?

2010-03-10 Thread Alexia Death
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Jay Smith j...@jaysmith.com wrote:
 You are going to hate this suggestion, but as long as certain browsers
 are causing you a problem, you may have to do browser sniffing and
 serve those users different content.  In other words, different image
 files get called for different browsers.  Of course, everything about
 that is wrong, but it solves your problem.

Problem is not serving different content. Problem is making content
that works for those, and ultimately for all browsers. So your
suggestion misses the point. The point is need to create images that
are not color managed or rather are managed as browser sees fit.

-- 
--Alexia
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] Paint Dynamics in git version

2010-03-10 Thread Aurimas Juška
Hi,

2010/3/10 Rob Antonishen rob.antonis...@gmail.com:
 What is the format for this?  If I wanted to distribute (for example)
 a set of pre-tagged patterns, could this be done currently in the dev
 build?

There is no such feature yet. The idea is a simple archive of resouces
+ tags + possibly some metadata.  When resource package is dragged on
GIMP it would install where necessary. Some tool to create such
packages would be good too. However, first tag file format would have
to be standardized a bit so that resource packages could be used not
only in GIMP.

Additional ideas are welcome.

Regards,
Aurimas
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] Paint Dynamics in git version

2010-03-10 Thread Rob Antonishen
2010/3/10 Aurimas Juška
 Hi,

 2010/3/10 Rob Antonishen
 What is the format for this?  If I wanted to distribute (for example)
 a set of pre-tagged patterns, could this be done currently in the dev
 build?

 There is no such feature yet. The idea is a simple archive of resouces
 + tags + possibly some metadata.  When resource package is dragged on
 GIMP it would install where necessary. Some tool to create such
 packages would be good too. However, first tag file format would have
 to be standardized a bit so that resource packages could be used not
 only in GIMP.

 Additional ideas are welcome.

 Regards,
 Aurimas


Thanks for the response.  So where/how are tags stored now?  In a
separate rc fil somewhere?

-Rob A
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


[Gimp-developer] More on tagging

2010-03-10 Thread Rob Antonishen
Hi-

I found this old thread:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/create/2009-February/001578.html

That talks about tagging.  I've also looked at the source, and am not
able to locate how the checksum is calculated.  It does not appear to
be a md5sum of the actual resource file.  How is it calculated?

-Rob A
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP color-management spec and further discussion

2010-03-10 Thread yahvuu
Martin Nordholts wrote:
  4) When an image with an explicit profile is exported
c) If the file format has no way to embed color profile information, 
 (FIXME!)
 
 In terms of a problem, this is pretty similar to when an image has 
 several layers and we export to an image format that does not support 
 layers, what do we do?. If the image doesn't support any kind of layer, 
 we simply merge or flatten the image, no questions asked. If the image 
 supports both layers and non-layers (such as animated GIF), we let the 
 user choose. I think we should do the same in this case: if the target 
 image format does not support color management whatsoever, we should 
 just write the RGB values verbatim, i.e. do the best of the situation 
 without becoming annoying and asking questions. If the written RGB 
 values are important than the user needs to do a color space conversion 
 before exporting into that format.

While this is certainly a good point and in contrast to what i've proposed
elsewhere [1], i'm a lot less shure that this the best solution.
The counter-arguments are just too striking:

a) *Not* converting to sRGB by default fosters the accidental release of
   unmanaged non-sRGB files, i.e. files, which cannot be interpreted correctly
   without external information.

b) A cycle of export and re-import should preserve as much of the image data
   as possible to comply with the principle of least surprise.
   From assuming sRGB on import follows conversion to sRGB on export here.

c) The layers analogy applies, but can be used with a slight twist:
   File formats that don't support profiles can be regarded as formats which 
don't
   support other color spaces than sRGB. So export should silently auto-convert
   by default.


regards,
yahvuu


[1] 
https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-developer/2010-February/024222.html

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP color-management spec and further discussion

2010-03-10 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
On 2/10/10, yahvuu wrote:

 Among garden-variety photo labs, it's pretty much standard to discard any
 color profile information and just assume sRGB.

It's pretty much standard where you live maybe, but not where *I* live :)

Alexandre
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP distributing sRGB profiles: license issues?

2010-03-10 Thread Jason Simanek
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Alexia Death alexiade...@gmail.com wrote:
 Problem is not serving different content. Problem is making content
 that works for those, and ultimately for all browsers. So your
 suggestion misses the point. The point is need to create images that
 are not color managed or rather are managed as browser sees fit.

Right. I don't think client sniffing is very efficient and probably
more complicated than needed. The 'progressive enhancement' approach
is much more pragmatic and one that is employed with other web
development features like CSS and JavaScript.

There are times when you have to work with the lowest common
denominator (web page image elements that need to match HTML and CSS
colors) and others where progressive enhancement allows you to provide
additional features/functionality without negatively affecting
visitors that aren't using the latest browsers (photographs with color
profiles).

-Jason Simanek
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer