Off the top of my head, I would think that the ICC is the right place to go for ICC color profiles (!) and indeed<div> </div><div><a href="http://www.color.org/srgbprofiles.xalter">http://www.color.org/srgbprofiles.xalter</a></div> <div> </div><div>shows us some profiles, and acceptable free license conditions. I would recommend the file<table width="90%" border="0" align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr><td align="left">sRGB_IEC61966-2-1_no black_scaling.icc </td></tr></tbody></table><div> </div><div>Edmund <div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Kai-Uwe Behrmann <<a href="mailto:ku.b@gmx.de" target="_blank">ku.b@gmx.de</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello Bernhard and bug hunters, there are different aspects for ICC profiles to work like expected. The most important thing, beside your/debian's requirement for proper licensing, is its correct colorimetry. That can be expected to be right for the icc-profiles-free included sRGB.icc from lcms and the same from ArgyllCMS called sRGB.icm. For instance the packages in question could require icc-profiles-free and a sRGB.icc profile gets installed on the system. Having only one sRGB profile installed is from a usability point of view very plausible. So requiring icc-profiles-free appears a logical option. The next is, applications need to identify the profile. Some applications search profiles by name. However, it is no good idea to reuse the "sRGB Color Space Profile.icm" name of the original HP profile, as that will cause confusion among users. But you might consider to replace the offending sRGB.icm with the sRGB.icm from the Argyll package. The old profile names need to be replaced by the new name in configuration files, source code and documentation. grep is your friend. Ideally the unit tests of the packages in question can spot issues. As you asked about, a Scarse sRGB profile variant has colorimetrically some errors. That might be fixed in newer versions. I do not know. <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openicc/2011q4/004425.html" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openicc/2011q4/004425.html</a> An newer review about sRGB profiles is here: <a href="http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/srgb-profile-comparison.html" target="_blank">http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/srgb-profile-comparison.html</a> Hope that helps, Kai-Uwe Behrmann Am 02.02.2013 16:51, schrieb Bernhard Reiter:<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Forwarding this to the OpenICC maling list requesting their help as per suggestion of user oy (Kai-Uwe Behrmann) in #scribus. Kind regards Bernhard Reiter PS: Please CC me (and the people I'm CC'ing) as I'm not subscribed to this list! -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Von: Stuart Prescott <<a href="mailto:stuart@debian.org" target="_blank">stuart@debian.org</a>> An: Oleksandr Moskalenko <<a href="mailto:malex@debian.org" target="_blank">malex@debian.org</a>>, Jonas Smedegaard <<a href="mailto:dr@jones.dk" target="_blank">dr@jones.dk</a>>, Bernhard Reiter <<a href="mailto:ockham@raz.or.at" target="_blank">ockham@raz.or.at</a>> Betreff: icm profiles in debian Datum: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 00:58:58 +0000 Dear icc-profiles-free maintainers, You may or may not have noticed a series of bugs filed about the inclusion of sRGB.icm from HP in a variety of different packages. Modified versions of this file are not distributable so inclusion in packages fails DFSG #3. We now have bugs #657281, #699301, #699304, #699305 and #699306 for packages that include this file. While trying to understand what can be done to solve this problem, I realised that a number of other packages also contained ICC/ICM profiles (e.g. krita, argyll, lcms, icc-profiles-free etc) and that there was a chance that one of these Free profiles would be suitable as an immediate replacement for the problematic profile currently in Debian. (I also wondered if these package should be using icc-profiles rather than shipping their own versions, but that's another question for another day.) At this stage, however, I reach my limit of knowledge about colour profiles and hope that perhaps one of you would be able to provide advice on the abovementioned bugs. Can one of the other sRGB.icm in Debian that claims to come from lcms or scarse and be under a permissive licence be used as a drop- in replacement for this file? Can the icc file from icc-profiles-free be utilised? If this can be done, then we potentially have a nice solution to 5 RC bugs... cheers Stuart -- Stuart Prescott <a href="http://www.nanonanonano.net/" target="_blank">http://www.nanonanonano.net/</a> <a href="mailto:stuart@nanonanonano.net" target="_blank">stuart@nanonanonano.net</a> Debian Developer <a href="http://www.debian.org/" target="_blank">http://www.debian.org/</a> <a href="mailto:stuart@debian.org" target="_blank">stuart@debian.org</a> GPG fingerprint BE65 FD1E F4EA 08F3 23D4 3C6D 9FE8 B8CD 71C5 D1A8 GPG fingerprint 90E2 D2C1 AD14 6A1B 7EBB 891D BBC1 7EBB 1396 F2F7 </blockquote> _______________________________________________ openicc mailing list <a href="mailto:openicc@lists.freedesktop.org" target="_blank">openicc@lists.freedesktop.org</a> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openicc" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openicc</a> </blockquote> _______________________________________________ openicc mailing list <a href="mailto:openicc@lists.freedesktop.org" target="_blank">openicc@lists.freedesktop.org</a> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openicc" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openicc</a> </div></div></blockquote></div> </div></div>