Elle Stone (ellestone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On 10/17/2014 06:39 AM, Simon Budig wrote: > >Elle Stone (ellestone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) 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 -- simon@xxxxxxxx http://simon.budig.de/ _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
