[Digikam-users] Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

[Martin (KDE)]

Am 07.10.2011 14:50, schrieb sleepless:
> Thank you Remco and Martin for your detailed and to the point responses.
> It has been all very informative.
> I had a dream but my final conclusion is that I am doomed to share my
> life with windows.

I would not second that. I work with Linux exclusively since more than
ten years. Only for my tax software I run windows once a year. And even
colour management is possible.

Working with Linux is different and as such difficult to many users. But
colour management is difficult regardless of the OS. Setting it up is
only a small part of it. Most software hides the complexity on windows
and MacOS but with this takes away the flexibility. It is the same with
photo handling. Why on earth do camera manufacturer remove raw
processing on cheep cameras without an option to enable it? Because no
one wants to use it? Because users get confused by that option? Same is
true for many other settings.

Many are satisfied with this setup but those who are not, what can they
do besides buying a different piece of hardware?

I don't care if other users uses windows. If they are satisfied with it
its OK. But many do not know that there is an alternate option out there
which fits their needs as well.

But this has nothing to do with digikam.

Martin

> 
> Once again I have to pray:
> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
> Courage to change the things I can,
> And wisdom to know the difference.
> (from Niehburh I think)
> 
> Best regards,
> Rinus
> 
> 
> Op 07-10-11 13:19, Martin (KDE) schreef:
>> Am 07.10.2011 13:06, schrieb Remco Viëtor:
>>> On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:
>>>> Hi Remco,
>>>>
>>>> Could you explain this to me this:
>>>> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
>>>> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces,
>>>> and
>>>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different
>>>> prints.
>>>> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
>>>> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
>>>> with native canon printerdriver.
>>>> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu wit
>>>> Turboprint.
>>>> Is this the proof that different  software interpreted color
>>>> profiles in
>>>> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?
>> Remco was faster than me, so just my small additions.
>>
>>> First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
>>> shop....
> I need to be in control because of to many disappointments and no refunds.
>>> And no, I don't think the colour profile is interpreted differently
>>> (as the
>>> profile only says 'for color (A,B,C) use colour (A+a,B+b, C+c)' )
>>>
>>> That said, there's a number of factors influencing colour
>>> reproduction on an
>>> inkjet printer: paper type, inks used, amount of ink used, etc. As
>>> with a
>>> screen, if you change any of these factors, you'll have to adapt your
>>> profile.
>>> And I bet Ubuntu doesn't use the same driver as windows (so amount of
>>> ink used
>>> per dot can very well change). The problem here is that you might not
>>> apply
>>> any corrections, but the drivers will have to send certain settings
>>> to the
>>> printer. If these differ between drivers, you're out of luck.
> yes so it is
>>> Or you have to start profiling your printer/paper combination, which
>>> requires
>>> a different spectrophotometer than for screen profiling (and those
>>> aren't the
>>> cheapest either).
>>> Final solution:
>>> Have a profile made to order:
>>>   - download a test image (colour patches of known hues)
>>>   - pick the settings and paper you want to use,
>>>   - print the test image,
>>>   - send  it to the provider of the test image, who will create the
>>> profile and
>>> send it to you (against payment...). Have a look in Google ;)
>>> Once again, such a profile is valid for ONE printer/paper
>>> combination, with
>>> ONE set of driver settings. Change anything, and you'll have to get
>>> another
>>> profile... (same as for screen: change any setting there and you'll
>>> have to
>>> reprofile)
>> Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
>> http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#PP1
> looks realy complicated to me.
>> here especial the part where reading the test chart is done with a
>> camera or a scanner.
>>
>> But Attention: This is in no way perfect. But If you own a good scanner
>> it will be better than using no profile at all.
>>
>> I for my part don't print photos at home (as Remco didn't). To me the
>> quality and efford is not worth the money. Choose a shop which supports
>> colour profiles (local or net). I use fotocommunity-prints (Germany) and
>> am happy with the results. They profile their machines every day.
>>
>>>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
>>>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.
>> I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work
>> great.
> Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
> readings?
>>
>> Regards
>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> Digikam-users mailing list
>> Digikam-users at kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> Digikam-users at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users