Am Montag, 3. März 2014, 09:54:19 schrieb [email protected]: > On 2014-03-03 [email protected] wrote: > > I understand the licencing issue, but it would be great if the oss tools > > would agree on one version of sRGB. > I agree, it makes darktable>gimp workflows a little bit annoying. It seems > like hugin might be a little confused by the profile name, too, although it > doesn't appear to cause problems. I'm wondering if using 'darktable' in the > name may cause other tools in the chain (some of which, as with websites, > are beyond user control) may cause unnecessary "conversion" to another sRGB > in many cases. Do the licensing issues actually require the profile name > field to be called something other than just 'sRGB'?
I don't know what version of darktable you are using, but the one I have generates the attached profile which actually calls the profile "sRGB" and only puts "Darktable" into the manufacturer field. If you want to compare, export an image with darktable and run convert <image> foo.icc to extract the embedded profile. > > Anyway, thanks for your work! > > +1 You are welcome. :)
foo.icc
Description: application/vnd.iccprofile
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
