Sven Neumann wrote:
> It certainly doesn't. Photos are taken in an RGB color space. It makes
> sense to do some processing in other color spaces such as LAB. But CMYK
> is totally inadequate for manipulating photos.
It really depends on what you are used to. To *you* RGB seems natural,
while to someone who has been brought up in the printing world, CMYK
seems natural, and it's RGB that is "weird". (You know which
is which when you ask them to evaluate a photograph. If they
say things like "it needs a couple of percent more magenta
in the mid tones, and a little less yellow there, ...", they
are from the print world, and think in CMYK. Many of these
professionals are unbelievably good at being able to spot what
needs to be done to an image in CMYK to correct it).
When preparing photographs for printing, it is extremely common
to want to edit them in CMYK space so as to be able to get the
best looking result within the limitations of that colorspace,
and to meet other technical requirements (total ink coverage,
black separation, etc.).
There is also the question of whether you define your goals
narrowly as photographs, or more generally as images or raster files.
If the latter, then there (ideally) shouldn't be any limitation
on the number of channels or colorspaces supported by an editing program.
Gimp-developer mailing list