On Wednesday 02 February 2005 10:27, David Purton wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 08:24:48AM +0100, Eilert wrote: > > The other day I exported some pages to PDF. There were 3 photos on the > > pages, and as I wanted them to come out as good as possible, I turned > > the choice to "maximum" quality. > > > > Much to my surprise, the photos became rather pale then, i. e. contrast > > was week, no dark colours (gamma setting?). Choosing a poorer quality > > let the pictures appear right again. > > By poorer quality, perhaps you mean selecting "screen/web" as opposed to > "printer" when creating the PDF? > > Is this the case? > > Thinking the difference between screen/web and printer is in quality > seems to be a common mistake people make. Perhaps Scribus should look at > renaming these options? > > The difference between screen/web and printer, is not in quality, but in > colour model. screen/web will produce an RGB colour based PDF, while > printer will produce a CMYK colour based PDF. > > > Did I detect a bug, or is it a feature? > > Well, that depends... > > If you don't have colour management set up, then it is a feature. > > If you do have colour management set up, then it is a bug. Colour > management in 1.2.1 for images is *completely* borked. > > (Yes, devs, I really can back this one up - The byte ordering of > channels expected by little CMS is *NOT* the same as the byte ordering > used by the QT QColor class. Look at the code and you will see that the > colour transforms assume that they are the same. Remember ages ago when > I said that I didn't understand why solid colours where proofed to > screen differently to images? This is why. As I said before patches and > bug reports are coming soon.)
Looking forward to them... Craig -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/pipermail/scribus/attachments/20050202/1a7ffec5/attachment.pgp
