[Digikam-users] Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures
kde at fahrendorf.de
Fri Oct 7 14:56:49 BST 2011
your replies are difficult to read. Can you add an empty line before and
after your comments? with this your comments are easier to find. I
missed some of your comments until I read Remcos reply.
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.
> 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,
> 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,
>>>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different
>>>> 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
>>>> 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
> I need to be in control because of to many disappointments and no refunds.
Try a photo lab using colour management (i.E.
www.fotocommunity-prints.de). These photos are not cheep but the result
>> Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
> looks realy complicated to me.
Na, it is not really hard. The difficult part is to understand what is
going on. Read the stuff several times and try it out. It is realy cheep
to do. All you need is a Test target (IT8 for example which costs about
20Euros if you order it from Wolf Faust) and a scanner.
The scans by the way are getting much better colour wise than without
the colour profile. Sane is capable of handling profiles.
>> 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
> Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
Yes, I have a (cheep) colorimeter (Spyder 2 - but I would not recommend
it any more). I profile/calibrate my monitor every now and then. With
the argyll tools you can profile as many monitors as you want. And you
can change every parameter you want. With the original software you can
only profile one. This is part of the freedom you have with free
software. Argyll runs on windows as well btw.
IMHO it is not possible to adjust colour in photos without a
calibrated/profiled monitor. You simply don't have any clue what this
change may look like on paper or different monitor.
I don't have a photospectrometer for profiling/calibrating printers.
This stuff cost 300Euros and more.
But at the end it is all about what you want and what you need. If you
are not satisfied with the colour result of your prints (either from
your printer or from the lab next corner) there is no alternative to
profiling/calibrating the hardware you use.
More information about the Digikam-users