GIMP and color use-cases

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by Dale, Jan 30, 2014.

  1. Dale

    Dale Guest

    http://www.gimp.org/

    GIMP is the only image software I use, I am running linux

    their color management has only two use-cases

    1) display
    2) soft proof

    wondered how that compares with Photoshop, Painter and others nowadays?

    why no

    3) hard proof
    4) press proof

    ?
     
    Dale, Jan 30, 2014
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Am 30.01.14 10:40, schrieb Dale:

    Because the Gimp can't make those materialize. Softproof is the furthest
    you can get to on a digital level.
     
    Mathias Dubois, Jan 30, 2014
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dale

    Dale Guest

    I can't really do vector all that well (Inkscape)
    and page layout is a thing of my past (Scribus)

    how far has XLS-FO gotten compared to postscript, ghostscript, etc.?

    http://www.w3schools.com/xslfo/

    seems like a RIP for both online and hardcopy would be nice
     
    Dale, Jan 31, 2014
    #3
  4. Dale

    Dale Guest

    not really much of an artist, my work was Kodak hybrid imaging systems
    integration, more of a tech guy

    my Uncle is an artist though, and he learned how to use Inkscape for
    icons, he would do well in commercial art, but he prefers fine art

    I remember Adobe had a Photoshop training CD for the basics, I went
    through the basics okay, but to create something with software like
    Painter is beyond me, linux lacks a image creator, you can do some of
    that with GIMP but its no where near the brush selection, etc., that
    Painter has
     
    Dale, Jan 31, 2014
    #4
  5. Am 31.01.14 01:55, schrieb Parko:
    These are layout programs, not image processing programs.

    As I already said: a hard proof is the product of a machine called a
    proofer, a press proof is the product of the original printing machine
    the job is expected to be done with. A softproof is a color reduction
    because sRGB and AdobeRGB both have a wider range of gamut than any
    printer can handle. There can only be one of those two options: display,
    which works with a wide range of colors that can be preceived on-screen
    and softproof which deals with a reduced set of colors, according to
    what the printer can handle.
     
    Mathias Dubois, Jan 31, 2014
    #5
  6. Dale

    Dale Guest

    you can simulate a hard proof, Kodak did it with PCS100, and maybe
    Prophecy and Design Master, Design Master was Eikonix before Kodak
    bought it, Kodak bought Eikonix because it had a patent which made
    scanners with filtration matching XYZ, Prophecy and PCS100 were the
    Eikonix Kodak people's products, I didn't quite understand that the
    print reference medium of the above products would have to be made inot
    an option for other media to get these products from the pre-press
    markets in which they were successful to the commercial photo labs that
    were interested in color management for multi-purposing of images

    one way to do a hard proof, you just use the proofer's profile and not
    the monitor, use the proofer's space as the working space

    one way if you want to simulate a hard proof on the monitor, you use the
    "reverse" transform in the profile for the proofer, for instance
    CMYK->XYZ, then XYZ of the proofer to XYZ of the monitor then the
    "forward" transform of the monitor's profile, for instance XYZ->RGB,
    this implies an XYZ working space, but you could pick a device space by
    XYZ->device

    a simulation of a press proof works the same way

    a better hard proof simulation incorporates the press's profile, for
    instance CMYK of press to XYZ of press to XYZ of proofer to XYZ of the
    monitor to RGB of the monitor

    all of the above should happen in the frame buffer of the graphics card
    above the working space, for instance RGB of proof or simulation of
    proof to RGB of working space, the working space should be held in
    memory for editing under the buffer, the edits are made to the
    simulation in the frame buffer then transferred to the working space and
    eventually a standard storage space which should be a CIE delta E* space
    like LAB or LUV for quality and purposing considerations

    I'm wondering if/when CIECAM will enter ICC

    I'm also wondering if/when ICC and W3C will meet
     
    Dale, Feb 1, 2014
    #6
  7. Am 01.02.14 06:29, schrieb Dale:
    Yes. This is what we call a softproof.
     
    Mathias Dubois, Feb 2, 2014
    #7
  8. Dale

    Savageduck Guest

    ....and even this is dependent on a calibrated monitor/display and your
    Mk.I eyeball.
     
    Savageduck, Feb 2, 2014
    #8
  9. Dale

    Dale Guest

    I have been out of the industry for almost 20 years now, and like I
    said, I was a hybrid systems engineer with a little experience in color
    science and prepress

    it would be interesting to see a whole listing of color workflow
    use-cases, especially in team with W3C, last time I looked at W3C they
    seem to be using sRGB, XLS-FO would need more than that since it seems
    to purpose documents for more than just web applications

    http://www.color.org
    http://www.w3.org/
    http://www.w3schools.com/xslfo/

    is XLS-FO an open systems RIP competing with Adobe Postscript?
     
    Dale, Feb 3, 2014
    #9
  10. Am 02.02.14 15:54, schrieb Savageduck:
    You win some, you lose some...

    A softproof is an economic and fast solution. Of course, you as the
    client are on duty of being able to view the proof properly. If you
    don't have a monitor with sufficient gamut and good calibration, you
    should pay the extra 10$ for a harproof.
     
    Mathias Dubois, Feb 4, 2014
    #10
  11. Am 03.02.14 07:08, schrieb Dale:
    A RIP consists of hardware + software. You feed it with Postscript, PDF
    or PCL and it spits out a raster image. It's a bit like a digestive
    system for vectors and ASCII, if you like, so neither Postscript nor
    XSL-FO are RIPs. Now to that: XSL is a script language that works on XML
    documents. XSL-FO is a part of that script language that aims at
    producing different document formats, including but not limited to
    Postscript and PDF so you couldn't use XSL-FO directly on a RIP. It
    would be like feeding seeds, ground and fertilizer to the digestive
    system ;)
     
    Mathias Dubois, Feb 4, 2014
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.