> Gamut checking is performed before the perceptual mapping. Hi Marti,
I basically wanted to question, is it really helpful for the user, if the checking is performed *before* the perceptual gamut compression (if perceptual intent is used)? Assume, I'm manipulating an image in an image editor. In order to estimate how the image would look when printed with perceptual intent, I'm displaying a soft proof on the screen, and I also turn on gamut warning. What happens? 60% of the image pixels are marked OOG :-( Nevertheless, if I would print the image with perceptual intent, the result would be pretty fine, and only say 5% of the image pixels really need to be clipped (after the perceptual gamut compression). Thus the gamut warning I can see in the proof is rather useless to assess the quality of the print. If, on the other hand, the warning would show me just the 5% of the image pixels, which are still OOG *after* the perceptual gamut compression (i.e. those pixels which will be clipped even if printed with perceptual intent), then this would IMO be a much more helpful visual feedback for my editing task. (In the proof, I basicall expect to see what I can see on the print, and all colors which have been remapped to in-gamut colors by the perceptual mapping, finally are no longer OOG on the print) Do you understand what I mean? How does actually PhS handle this issue? Regards, Gerhard -- DSL Komplett von GMX +++ Superg�nstig und stressfrei einsteigen! AKTION "Kein Einrichtungspreis" nutzen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Lcms-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lcms-user
