Bug 691632 - Default CMYK profile is less than ideal
Summary: Default CMYK profile is less than ideal
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 690626
Alias: None
Product: MuPDF
Classification: Unclassified
Component: fitz (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC MacOS X
: P4 normal
Assignee: Tor Andersson
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-09-20 19:50 UTC by James Strother
Modified: 2010-09-27 11:59 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Customer:
Word Size: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description James Strother 2010-09-20 19:50:11 UTC
I just did a quick test drive of mupad, and was fairly impressed with the performance.  However, I tried to open a couple of CMYK PDFs and found that the color representation was exceedingly poor (in my photos it looks like everyone is infected with some sort of flesh eating bacteria).

Before you stop me, I recognize that CMYK is device independent and that CMYK to RGB conversion depends on the profile, my point is that the profile that is chosen by default may not be the best.

I took a look at the source, and I am honestly not sure what is going on there.  It looks like cmyktoxyz() converts cmyk to CIE XYZ using some undocumented color profile, but then those XYZ values are used as RGB values?  It's not clear to me.

At any rate, it seems to be that the default should use the SWOP profile (http://www.swop.org/specification), which appears to be the default Adobe CMYK profile.  This provides a precise transform to CIELAB, which has a precise transform to RGB.

Of course, just using the SWOP profile won't work perfectly either, since other people would use different profiles.  But that seems like it would be a much better default profile then whatever is being used now.
Comment 1 Tor Andersson 2010-09-27 11:59:24 UTC
You should have seen it before when we were using the algorithm from the old PDF spec! Once we fix issue #690626 we will add a decent CMYK ICC profile as the default.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 690626 ***