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

[Jan-Peter Homann]

Hello Scott,
Your paper is already discussed in an internal mailinglist of ICC 
members. (I´m also an ICC member as an consultant)
We all want to invite You for further discussions on ICC-user 
mailinglist maintained from the ICC and monitored from a lot of ICC members.

Regards
Jan-Peter

Scott Geffert wrote:
> 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 
> <http://www.cdiny.com> the article is called "*Adopting ISO Standards 
> for Museum Imaging"* 
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott Geffert, Center for Digital Imaging, Inc. 1/2008 
>
>


-- 
***********   Neue Adresse / new adress   ************

homann colormanagement ------ fon/fax +49 30 611 075 18
Jan-Peter Homann ------------- mobile +49 171 54 70 358
Christinenstr. 21 ------ http://www.colormanagement.de
10119 Berlin -------- mailto:homann at colormanagement.de

***********   Neue Adresse / new adress   ************