On Saturday 05 August 2006 19:53, Hal V. Engel wrote: > same size and shape as BetaRGB. BetaRGB has a gamut that is almost > twice as large as sRGB (69% of Lab vs. 35% of Lab). So this gives you
Well, this is mathematically true, but not so much in human perception. The differences are in extremes. I don't say BetaRGB is bad, but sRGB is close to our vision, and the effort to go to the extremes can be high, regarding to the real gain. Don't forget you will have to convert all your images when you send them to friends, or on the web. This can be a lot of work. We are still at the begining of all that stuff; in a few years, sRGB will be switched to a larger colorspace, which will become the new standard. It is hard to stay to the top, especially under Linux, where there are a few tools which can do the job. I prefer keep this time to make pictures ;o) Anyway, I think that even using sRGB, the digital pictures are now far better than what we did in analog, a few years ago. At least, results are more constant, as we do not depend anymore on film, and film processing, which could be from very good to very bad ! And to answer to Simon, I think Gimp-2.3 is a good starting choice. It is very easy to compile under Linux, so... And, sure, Cinepaint. -- Frédéric http://www.gbiloba.org
pgpviBioqSgQP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________ Lcms-user mailing list Lcms-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lcms-user
