On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Chris Murphy <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lists@colorremedies.com">lists@colorremedies.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> As I think about it, the most reliable "no color management" tag is a message directly to the thing that does the conversions. And that's the CMM. So the message would be a particular kind of ICC profile.<br> <br> Of course we'd be best off getting such a profile endorsed by the ICC, but I don't know that's necessary. If we get lcms on board, that's 1/2 the battle right there since it seems our focus for a color managed print pipeline right now is CUPS+GhostScript+lcms. We know ICC profiles are passing through all the way to the CMM or we wouldn't get conversions (assumed or otherwise), so this makes some sense.<br> <br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If you mean a "null" profile (or null transform), there is already a concept of that in ICC...<br></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> My preference is that this ICC profile would be a header only profile, no body, and class 'spac' (ColorSpace Conversion) to differentiate it and hopefully avoid it being obviously useable and embeddable like very common 'mntr' (display device) class, and 'prtr' (output device profile) class profiles are. I'm not sure what the PDF spec thinks about 'spac' class profiles however...could be a sticking point.<br> <font color="#888888"><br></font></blockquote><div><br></div><div>PDFs can only use mntr & prtr profiles.</div><div><br></div><div>Leonard </div></div>