[Openicc] Printing Plans GhostScript / sRGB / ICC

[Chris Murphy]

On Mar 7, 2011, at 7:49 PM, Graeme Gill wrote:

> Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Upstream the user has asked for prematching with an ICC profile in an application.
> 
> That's what it's there for.

If the document is prematched, it means it has already been converted for the printer, which means default CMYK simulation of SWOP is invalid.

> 
>> Or
>> they have asked for "mid-stream" matching by Ghostscript by choosing an ICC profile in
>> the CPD.
> 
> There is no Ghostscript in this situation - the PPD is part of the front end
> to the RIP.

You're talking presently. I'm talking about how it should work if we want to ICC color manage PostScript to PostScript devices. I understand the consequences of abandoning these sorts of devices, but I find it to be nothing but very closed loop and not eager to be part of an open eco system.

> 
>> Why should the user also have to know they need to disable the equivalent of "screw
>> everything up" mode?
> 
> I've no idea what you mean. You seem to be assuming that someone is proposing all
> this and that it somehow can't work. The opposite is true - it's well tried and
> tested in the field, and is a workable approach technically and from a user
> point of view.

It does not work well if you try to build custom profiles for these printers, and then try to use the supplied PPD, OS and applications. It's very convoluted, even on Mac OS.


>> As I said, if it's *really* perceived to be working for 99% as you say, then there is
>> no problem to solve (other than it's ugly and ridiculous and confusing). We should not
>> change a single thing, and instead focus on other problems.
> 
> Yes, I agree. It's a practical way of dealing with DeviceXXX and "color dumb"
> applications, and it would save a lot of time and effort in re-learning all
> this, to pick the best bits and move on.

I knew we'd eventually realize we're in agreement.


Chris Murphy