On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:47 AM, "Christoph Sch?fer" wrote: >> Pantone is what people use and they will keep using it as long as this >> is what the market chooses. Whether you want Scribus to alienate >> itself from the market or not is up to you, of course. > > People also eat junk food. Does that make it a healthy diet? Also, from my > experience, people, including professionals, have no idea how to use Pantone > (or HKS, or Toyo etc.) "correctly".
My experience is different. Surely we don't need an argument over whose experience is the right kind of experience? >> > The Libre Graphics world has a much better alternative in its hand, namely >> > the Open Colour Systems >> > Collection (http://dtpstudio.de/downloads/OCSC_1_0.zip), which includes >> > two colour palettes using the >> > CIELAB and CIEHLC colour models. Colour fans using this model for CMYK >> > print are availabale for a >> > fraction of the costs of Pantone or any other vendor's references, and >> > they're truly open: >> > http://dtpstudio.de/cielab/shop.php >> >> You know, I contacted them in the past and asked some hard questions >> about some color science and technology related points they were >> making, how they wanted this to penetrate the market, what kind of >> standartization they had in mind etc. I never heard back from them. My >> takeaway from that is that they want to make a change, but only have a >> few vague ideas. > > I will only answer the part on standardisation in public and reply to the > rest privately. There's no need to > standardise anything, because the colour fans are using an existing and open > standard called CIELAB. > Pantone, HKS, RAL and others distribute the digital versions of their colour > palettes in that very same > standard. The major difference is that they add their internal and > proprietary numbering scheme and > reduce the number of available colours. It's more than likely that Pantone's > and other vendors' colours > are included in the CIELAB and CIEHLC fans, but the numbers aren't there > (only colour values). > That's simply a result of physics. Christoph, I have to respectfully point out that you are trying to answer a question you haven't even heard. My _actual_ question (well, there were five of them, in fact) was about this part of the press release: "FreieFarbe / FreeColour and dtp studio would be pleased to cooperate with the Libre Graphics Community on improvements to the SBZ format, its eventual standardisation, or the development of better alternatives". Since you are not representative of dtpstudio, I assume that you are probably not in a position to answer the original questions, but for clarity's sake, here they are: a) What role would you [FreieFrabe initiative members] play in this cooperation? b) Olivier Berten hasn't worked on SwatchBooker for over 4 years (this part changed a bit since my original email in May). Who would be doing the development? c) In what way would you [FreieFrabe initiative members] like to enhance SBZ? d) Are you [FreieFrabe initiative members] aiming for ISO standartization, or DIN, or something else? e) How would you [FreieFrabe initiative members] make sure that standardized file format wouldn't become still-born, that is, having little-to-no real-life use? I have a lot more more questions like these ones. They all question what Freie Farbe attempts to do. They are not necessarily nice questions. But they need to be asked, because, frankly, the memories of the whole GiveLife Color System are still very much alive. Actually, now that I come to think of it, we probably _should_ have a nice long thorough discussion of this whole project anyway, whether FreieFarbe members choose to participate or not. I don't think it will get us anywhere in terms of market penetration, but at least everyone might get a slightly better idea avbout what we are in fact discussing here. And maybe, just _maybe_ it will get free software project to adopt SBZ just like MyPaint, GIMP, Krita and friends adopted OpenRaster a while ago. Alex
