2011/11/27 Bogdan Szczurek <thebodzio@xxxxxxxxx>: > …or they miss some vital functionalities like I do. Higher bit depths or > built-in raw handling are not really the case for me here. What is? Proper > CMYK, Lab and multichannel support. These can be provided by recent > architectural changes, but I adhere to the current status quo. Without it, > it's hard to think seriously about GIMP in publishing industry. Well, that's not entirely true. Print industry is shifting progressively to late binding RGB workflows and CMYK survives only because of habit. Working with early binding (CMYK from the beginning) isn't exactly a good idea in this age of cross-media publishing. Adobe and Pantone are pushing towards RGB workflows but keep those legacy modes because too many professionals insist on using a workflow from the past century ;-) I switched to intermediate/late binding two or three years ago, and if I see a difference, it favors RGB. Mostly in CTPs (my print provider recently added a hybrid AM/FM CTP and RGB performs much better than CMYK there). I do a lot of offset printing, every week and I haven't perceived any disadvantage since I moved to RGB. Regarding channels and LAB, you have a point, but I'm sure that once we have a high bit depth LAB internal processing (correct me if I'm wrong but that's the idea, right?) the rest will be just around the corner. Even the decompose command will be useful :-p _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
