[Openicc] ALL YOU NEED IS A PROFILE, THE MYTH. (WAS CC Profiles In X Specification and dispwin)

[edmund ronald]

On Jan 17, 2008 11:33 PM, Graeme Gill <graeme at argyllcms.com> wrote:
> Robert Krawitz wrote:
Graeme,

 I think it's time to help me explain to the Gutenprint/CUPS crowd
that they now have working drivers which the domain experts can
improve themselves IF GIVEN THE ABILITY TO DO SO. Which means
parameters OUTSIDE the C code.

 Which means that hard-coded stuff inside the C files should be
deprecated, and a documented CENTRAL FILE  containing all ink and
dot-related parameters should be made available, AT LEAST FOR
EXPERIMENTAL PURPOSES so people can construct and experiment with
front-ends eg. GUIs and with the parameters which make the existing
engine work best. Oh, and by the way there is such a thing as XML
which has been created exactly for this purpose of creating portable
(parameter) files which are both machine readable and human
debuggable.

 As you and others have pointed out, profiles and device links can
iron out a lot of issues. It's really getting necessary for users to
be let loose on this thing and deal themselves with inks and
linearisation, rather than spending forever deciding which arcane
feature should be buried in the C code at the next revision.

Edmund



> > A while back I did some thinking about how to adjust the light/dark
> > ink tradeoff depending upon the total ink load, but I never got very
> > far...
>
> I suspect such an approach may be too intricate to implement, and
> hard coding such an algorithm into the print pipeline makes it
> rather inflexible.
> The ink limiting in a profile can account for the ink load
> introduced into a composite channel or due to a separation step.
> You just need a format to feed this information into the profile
> creation.
>
> Graeme Gill.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openicc mailing list
> openicc at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openicc
>