> (lit by a 5000k light), and then maybe converting it
> to TIFF and use SCARSE (www.scarse.org) or whatever.
> Would that be already sufficient to get good results?
> Or at least beeter than sRGB? Not sure about it...
>
> It seems that it is still not too common for manufacturers
> of cameras to simply provide ICC profiles?
>
Although I'm still a bit ignorant of all the intricies of color
management, as I understand it the problem is that it's impossible to get
an accurate ICC profile for a camera unless the lighting is held constant.
ICC profiles translate into (and out of) an *absolute* colorspace (like
Lab or XYZ)... that isn't possible unless you know the white point of the
lighting of the shot.
I wish that they would at least provide the profiles for their
built-in settings... "Sunny," "Shady," "Tungsten," etc.
Oh, and until Gimp does >8 bits, it's pretty useless for accurate
photographic work. With only 8-bits you must read in a photo in a
gamma-corrected space (like sRGB or AdobeRGB). If you use a gamut wide
enough to capture everything (like ProRGB or its ilk), you'll have way too
much posterization to be useful for photos.
-Cory
--
*************************************************************************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
*************************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
