https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=367832
--- Comment #16 from Elle Stone <e...@ninedegreesbelow.com> --- (In reply to Tyson Tan from comment #15) > MS and Adobe both supplies a sRGB V2 profile with their software. Adobe also > provides a color profile download that includes sRGB and AdobeRGB profiles. Do you have a link? I checked the Adobe website about a month ago, and there were no sRGB profiles in the download pack, and haven't been for quite awhile. > Last time I checked, the said sRGB profiles was produced by ICC in the meta > information. Ubuntu also has a similar sRGB profile to generate default ICC > for everything. If you cannot find them, I can extract them later for you. I'm not sure what you mean by "Last time I checked, the said sRGB profiles was produced by ICC in the meta information." A kind person sent me two files exported from CS5 and CS6 with embedded sRGB profiles, and the copyright was by Hewlett-Packard. The sRGB profiles downloadable from color.org are copyrighted by the ICC. These are the only sRGB profiles I've ever seen that are copyrighted by the ICC. Your offer to send extracted profiles is very kind, but there's no need. I have an extensive collection of sRGB profiles from a previous investigation of "the" sRGB profile. And I'm pretty sure that if you extracted a profile from an image and sent the profile to me, and the profile wasn't copyrighted as CC0, public domain, etc, then you'd be violating the profile copyright. Fortunately you can easily eximine embedded profiles by using exiftool: exiftool filename.png As an aside, the sRGB profile embedded by CS5/CS6 (one on Windows, one on Mac) in the two images that were sent to me is a profile that libpng marks as "known incorrect sRGB profile". The CMM tag says "Lino" and the copyright tag says Hewlett-Packard. I could be wrong, but I think this profile might be distributed by the OS, not by PhotoShop. Of course this doesn't preclude the possibility that there really is an ICC-copyrighted sRGB profile distributed along with some versions of PhotoShop. If Firefox with default settings on OSX treats the old "Lino" profile as sRGB, how does it treat Graham Gill's sRGB.icm profile? If you wouldn't mind checking, I included a png with Graham Gill's profile embedded in my post to my website (http://ninedegreesbelow.com/bug-reports/browsers-and-icc-profiles.html). > The cheapest workaround is simple: change the default value of “Embed sRGB > profile” to UNCHECKED, and ideally add some explanation text below so people > don’t try to be smart by checking it. We are already doing that when > exporting JPG, why not PNG too? I understand that as a developer, you want > things to work according to the standard with a correct process. But people > just want to see correct result. As long as the user has a chance to check the box to embed the profile, and keep that box checked, instead of having to check it every time, your solution sounds reasonable. But it results in what the esteemed Bruce Fraser called "mystery meat" images. In an ICC profile color managed workflow, images need embedded ICC profiles. I understand that there are exceptions. And it's a shame that Firefox has created such a disaster for color managing images posted to the web. But it would be best if Krita users have the option to made a choice to embed (or not embed) a profile and have that choice "stick" until they deliberately make the opposite choice. Best, Elle -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
