Please can anyone give some information on whether colour management is implemented in Haiku?
I’d like to know, for example, if and how monitor or device profiles are used in the OS, and whether applications like showimage use colour profiles embedded in image files.
Thank you.
Back in 2006 it was said that this work was being held off until Haiku R2
https://www.haiku-os.org/community/forum/color_management_system
Certainly there is no sign of a CMS implementation in the Haiku source tree today, unlike in popular mainstream systems.
[quote=NoHaikuForMe]Back in 2006 it was said that this work was being held off until Haiku R2
https://www.haiku-os.org/community/forum/color_management_system
Certainly there is no sign of a CMS implementation in the Haiku source tree today, unlike in popular mainstream systems.[/quote]
Yes the proper way to fix poorly calibrated equipment, is to do it with software.
Is there any particular reason it’s being held off, or is it just low priority?
Why should it be implemented ? It you need it, the equipment is broken.
How so? The computer needs to take into account colour profiles embedded in image files and the limits of the devices attached to it.
do you really need to ask that question ? Think about it, if we can’t all agree that pure red is a value of 255 then how would we ever calibrate equipment. Working around poorly calibrated equipment isn’t the solution, the solution is to fix the equipment so that a red with a value of 255 is the same on every device.
shame on the manufacturers for not following color standards.
Basically thatguy is taking the same approach he took in the various audio threads: if he doesn’t understand it, then it doesn’t exist. For example his idea of “pure red is a value of 255” confuses hue and intensity, this sort of goof wouldn’t be made by someone who had even a layman’s interest in colour, but for someone who doesn’t care about it except to dismiss it as trivial, it seems like a perfectly sensible belief.
If you want to, you can explain metamerism, colour gamuts, colour temperature, and so on. My guess is that if you try hard you’ll shift thatguy from “equipment is broken” to “everything should work in sRGB” which would be a small victory in itself but won’t help him grasp why anybody would need Colour Management.
You missed the point, as usuall. A properly calibrated and functioning piece of equipment, does not need color corrections, becuase it is already “correct”. Shipping mis calibrated equipment is the same thing as shipping broken equipment. If it ain’t right at one calibration point, how can you be sure to trust the color correction data in the device to begin with ? They have already demonstratd they can’t properly produce a piece of properly calibrated equipment.
The solution is to make the manufacturers properly calibrate the equipment during production. Not to try and fix the problem down stream.
The problem is not my lack of understanding, its your lack of common sense. If its broke, its broke.
as to the audio threads. I have way more hands on audio experience then you, lets just leave it at that. You absolutely have no idea what your talking about so just don’t bring it up.
[quote=NoHaikuForMe]
If you want to, you can explain metamerism, colour gamuts, colour temperature, and so on. My guess is that if you try hard you’ll shift thatguy from “equipment is broken” to “everything should work in sRGB” which would be a small victory in itself but won’t help him grasp why anybody would need Colour Management. [/quote]
If the equipment is not properly calibrated, its freaking broken.
Whether or not equipment should be shipped out of the factory able to reproduce a full spectrum of colour perfectly, it doesn’t. And the most reliable way to ensure proper colour reproduction is to use a combination of software profiles to match virtual colours to real signals, and hardware optimisation. Even if the hardware were perfect, if applications don’t pay attention to the details in the file, the system won’t work. Although it’s not its main market, many people have said that it would be good to use Haiku in the media, and without colour management, this would be impossible.
Seriously thatguy, stop trolling. Colour management is very complex. Please read up on it instead of being ignorant.
Color management solves a problem, that shouldn’t exist.
Yes, if everyone was using the same calibration, the same combination of hardware, used the same capturing equipment and had the same lighting condition in their workspace it wouldn’t be a problem. Still most people prefer to live in world which has a lot of different conditions.
While thatguy is pretty much right if we only had a well defined RGB, however, the problem does exist (even if it’s very annoying), and so Haiku needs to be able to deal with it.
Besides that, we already need to do proper color management to handle files/output devices that aren’t targeted at the “normal” RGB color space, like printers or monitors that use a different color space such as sRGB.
However, beyond printing, this is usually pretty much only needed in professional environments, where you won’t find Haiku for the lack of software alone. For the average user, color management is usually indeed pretty much superfluous (and annoying ;-)). In the long run, Haiku won’t have much choice but to support it, anyway, though.
sRGB is the “normal” colour space for the Internet. sRGB is roughly what you get if you buy a PC from a big box store and set it up in a typical office without any special calibration. That’s why it was chosen, most of the colour standards in widespread use by professionals assume you have a specially lit environment that’s pretty different from a home or office.
A properly colour-managed system treats unlabelled computer images as sRGB since someone who doesn’t apply a colour profile label to an image most likely has a typical home or office PC setup which will be roughly the environment specified in sRGB. All web colours (e.g. CSS colours) are defined to be sRGB.
But sRGB doesn’t align very well with the gamut available from a colour printer, nor is it very suitable for photographs taken in a professional studio or hundreds of other applications. So although Haiku can (and does, to some extent) get away with doing nothing for everyday home computer use like surfing the web, if you want to work in print or do professional photography the lack of colour management would be a problem.
If you have a specialist display (e.g. a self-calibrating 21" CRT) which is already properly calibrated to some other standard, the lack of colour management means that absolutely everything will look wrong when running Haiku. Of course most people in this scenario would never consider running Haiku anyway.
Generally only professionals need and use color calibration, or color management, so this is not a short term ‘need to have’ feature for Haiku. It will be an issue when there is professional imaging software available on Haiku, and when professionals start using it.
Each imaging device in the chain, from input to output, needs a color profile of the colors it supports. A color profile is a file in a standard format, sometimes under copyright restriction, often provided by the manufacturer. Each profile helps the color management system keep track of colors of an image as the image moves from input, to software, to output.
Here is a nice description:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-management1.htm
"the lack of colour management means that absolutely everything will look wrong when running Haiku."
Actually, it means it won’t look absolutely professionally perfect. Probably just fine for every day use.
My contention is that a cannon, nikkon etc should all capture and reproduce red exactly the same. IE no variation between the 2 unless the variation is intentionally introduced by deliberate filtering methods. everything beyond that is a attempt at band aiding a problem that has been left to fester like a open sore in the community. We assume that color profiles are correct in the first place, but we already know they aren’t because we have significant deviation sometimes between 2 devices coming of the same production line months apart.
Its time to start forcing all the manufacturers to comply with a color standard and have it define by some agency like the national institutes of standards and measures. At that point color management and representation become a certification process, not a software hack fixing a hardware problem.
same goes for monitors and other devices. That means a controlled standard test and environment and everyone uses the same ruler. the purpose of NIST is to ensure that 1inch is 1inch etc.
Here we have a case where everyone is defining a inch in a different way. a inch must be a inch.
Thatguy,
What you are saying is based on a misconception of color. Each and every input and output device has a different color space that it supports. That’s the way it has been, that’s the way it will always be. Each CMOS sensor is different. Each CCD sensor is different. Every CMYK ink cartridge or ink set is different. Each monitor is different.
Blaming this on manufacturers is like commanding the tide to stop.
[quote=AndrewZ]
And this is completely separate from the whole issue of color calibration. Which
is really only of interest to graphics professionals who output to CMYK ink printing.
And even then many of them have no need for it because professional devices aren’t
’off’ that often or by that much.[/quote]
To answer your question, I don’t care what the differences actually are, I care that the final product in my hand meets a sane calibration standard and has proper performance when test in a constant enviroment against other devices.
IE we all know that thousands of companies make parts for all manner of devices, but in this instance we are saying screw it, those 1% threshold resistors, we’ll just adjust the circut for the variance after we install them.
NIST already has a well define sRGB color platform testing and validation scheme, all everyone needs to do is adhere to it.
[quote=AndrewZ]Thatguy,
What you are saying is based on a misconception of color. Each and every input and output device has a different color space that it supports. That’s the way it has been, that’s the way it will always be. Each CMOS sensor is different. Each CCD sensor is different. Every CMYK ink cartridge or ink set is different. Each monitor is different.
Blaming this on manufacturers is like commanding the tide to stop.[/quote]
holding a reasonable tolerance, should be the expectation. Inversely as a group, technology users, are allowing manufacturers to run away with tolerance. Also as stated, since they already have abundantly proven they cannot accurately calibrate equipment, why should we expect that the supplied color calibration information for color management profiles, is also correct.
National Institute for Standards and Technology has well defined test,procedures etc to correct this issue.
If the CMOS sensor improperly perceives color, fix it. Its broke.
this would akin to buying a new door from Toyota, for your Toyota Camry, and then having to file fit the door to the car. Obviously a unacceptable situation.