[Openicc] L* ... (please move topic to ECI-EN mailinglist)

[Scott Geffert]

Dear Jan-Peter,Robert

	I stumbled across some very angry threads regarding eciRGBv2 and L*  
on the openicc forum. I'm afraid that I am in the center of the  
debate. Unlike theory guys like Chris I focus 100% in the field since  
pre photoshop days. My specialty is digital photography whereas many  
color specialists  came from a DTP and prepress background, my color  
management experience has always been from digital input to output. Of  
all of the customer problems that I face on a daily basis #1 would  
have to be the very antiquated idea of gamma. Users are not stupid,  
but the industry treats them as such by avoiding the fact that that  
all computer displays can be configured to the same standards, and  
frankly L* is the most agnostic approach as it is based on human tonal  
perception. The ECI adoption of the L* based working space has an  
impact that makes digital capture crystal clear. 50L=128. Ask 100  
photographers to photograph a gray card today using three of the  
leading image processing apps and you will get completely random  
results. Why? the industry has allowed itself to run out of control  
when it comes to standard practices. Each tool presents the user with  
different gamma gradations,rgb readouts, percentage readouts, and none  
are documented.
	The L* and ISO standards are going to prove to be critical for  
digital imaging to mature. Chris is correct in that in a 16 bit  
workflow ICC takes care of the gamma mess, but he fails to understand  
the bigger picture. Not everyone wants of needs to have a color  
consultant to have a repeatable process, or to go to a photo lab or  
printer and expect a consistent result. For my worldwide museum  
clients it is absolutely essential that ISO standards can help  
preserve cultural history for future generations. Right now, legacy  
shortcomings in the imaging field are being propped up by ICC alone.  
As a supposed scientist Chris is incredibly closed minded on this  
topic, but I don't know why.
	I recently posted an article that actually laid out very a very  
specific international case study comparing calibrated digital  
captures processed to AdobeRGB, ProPhotoRGB, eciRGBv2, and ProStarRGB  
(a proposed wide gamut RGB space with L* TRC-it's literally  
ProPhotoRGB modified to L*) Chris has seen this document, so I don't  
know why he can say that no one has tested it. By the way, the results  
on screen and in print are better! Chris and a select group of "color  
experts" have personally attacked this article which was only  
presented as a field test of existing and proposed standards. The  
intent of my article was to encourage thoughtful discussion, and  
frankly to push Adobe and camera manufacturers to get behind ISO  
standards. The statement that Chris made regarding ISO standards  
should "Just Die" are incredibly short sighted and unprofessional.

Anyway, please feel free to post this up to the ECI board or anywhere  
else.

You can download the article from our web site: www.cdiny.com the  
article is called "Adopting ISO Standards for Museum Imaging"

Thanks,

Scott Geffert, Center for Digital Imaging, Inc. 1/2008


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openicc/attachments/20080308/96ee508b/attachment.html