Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: missing black point compensation in Canon plugin  (Read 1751 times)
tyurek
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« on: July 21, 2008, 03:21:55 PM »
ReplyReply

The black point compensation option used with the relative colorimetric rendering intent is stated to be a proprietary Adobe solution in numerous references.  Does this mean that there can be licensing issues with third party external plugins enabling this option? Could this be the reason why the Canon iPF external Photoshop plugin's relative colorimetric intent selection is missing this option? The discussions on the Canon wiki mention this as a bug in the plugin which Canon may be working on, but I wonder how such an important option can be an omission.
Logged
Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1287


WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2008, 04:55:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Canon's response to my question about this has been "BPC works great with the Perceptual intent that most people will want to use so adding it to RelCol is a lower priority."
Logged

TylerB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2008, 07:40:34 PM »
ReplyReply

uh oh, that's funny.
Since perceptual maps everything to in gamut anyway, and that includes the shadows, hence the black point, something akin to BPC is happening anyway, clicked on or not...
So their reply was somewhat... uninformed? Dismissive? Anyway...
Relative Colormetric is where we need BPC, and implementing it, or something like it, seems to be an issue for anything outside of the Adobe workflows. Basically they have to come up with thei r own versions. ACE was released as a stand alone CMM at some point, supposedly with access to BPC, so other app, driver, or RIP providers should be able to take advantage of that, but I haven't seen anyone doing it.
Tyler
Logged
Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1287


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2008, 10:28:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Since perceptual maps everything to in gamut anyway, and that includes the shadows, something akin to BPC is happening anyway, clicked on or not...[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209841\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There's no BPC checkbox in the plug-in and one can always print via the traditional route using PS's BPC but your point is taken - they should update RelCol with BPC or take it out. Leaving it in without BPC is leading to disappointing results.

Quote
ACE was released as a stand alone CMM at some point, supposedly with access to BPC, so other app, driver, or RIP providers should be able to take advantage of that, but I haven't seen anyone doing it.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209841\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
FYI, ColorBurst has implemented Adobe's BPC in the Mac version of their RIP. I say anything is better than clipping, even when it's at the expense of colorimetric accuracy.
Logged

TylerB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2008, 12:51:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Scott, I find both rendering intents necessary, at different times for different reasons, and of course you are right, some kind of black point mapping is absolutely necessary for colormetric.
I use StudioPrint, and they took a long time to implement something for RelCol. We were all preconverting in PS for RelCol, using BPC of course.
I have often wondered what the difficulties are, it's been needed for years, and Adobe's was the only thing going for a long time.
T
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad