Return-Path: <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>
Received: from inas004.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by inav006.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-AV-3.00) with ESMTP id kB77GULJ017306
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 7 Dec 2006 08:16:30 +0100
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from inmx017.isp.belgacom.be (inmx017.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.4.129])
        by inas004.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-AS-2.03) with ESMTP id kB77GJwP002885
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 7 Dec 2006 08:16:20 +0100
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from duke.maptools.org (r153.dmsolutions.ca [209.217.116.153] (may be forged))
        by inmx017.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-2.32) with ESMTP id kB77G6Ox007082
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 7 Dec 2006 08:16:06 +0100
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from duke.maptools.org (duke.maptools.org [127.0.0.1])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id kB71YSKV021820;
	Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:35:33 -0500
Received: from mailout13.yourhostingaccount.com
	(mailout13.yourhostingaccount.com [65.254.253.110])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id kB71Wet4021808
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:32:41 -0500
Received: from scan07.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.1.237]
	helo=scan07.yourhostingaccount.com)
	by mailout13.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim)
	id 1Gs87q-0006Wf-EP
	for tiff@lists.maptools.org; Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:32:38 -0500
Received: from authsmtp04.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.18.4] ident=exim)
	by scan07.yourhostingaccount.com with spamscanlookuphost (Exim)
	id 1Gs87q-0008HC-8r
	for tiff@lists.maptools.org; Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:32:38 -0500
Received: from authsmtp04.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.18.4]
	helo=authsmtp04.yourhostingaccount.com)
	by scan07.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim)
	id 1Gs87p-0008H6-M3
	for tiff@lists.maptools.org; Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:32:37 -0500
Received: from cust3861.vic01.dataco.com.au ([202.164.193.21] helo=[10.0.0.1])
	by authsmtp04.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128)
	(Exim) id 1Gs87p-00061N-1N
	for tiff@lists.maptools.org; Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:32:37 -0500
Message-ID: <45776E20.1050406@argyllcms.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 12:28:00 +1100
From: Graeme Gill <graeme2@argyllcms.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
	rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tiff@lists.maptools.org
Subject: Re: [Tiff] Re: Tiff Digest, Vol 31, Issue 3
References: <200612051704.kB5H4sEL015586@duke.maptools.org><4575F91A.9090504@swiftview.com>	<457623C5.90603@argyllcms.com><003201c71979$12f4d180$c28cf651@dfgrrxsknr4e>	<457741DD.4020606@argyllcms.com>
	<009b01c7198e$7b2cc310$c28cf651@dfgrrxsknr4e>
In-Reply-To: <009b01c7198e$7b2cc310$c28cf651@dfgrrxsknr4e>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-EN-UserInfo: 4278ddcaa0afbc5edf619268be555fc4:fcefc52a98eff5eb12ac042c4438d4fd
X-EN-AuthUser: graeme@argyllcms.com
X-BeenThere: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
Reply-To: graeme@argyllcms.com
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion <tiff.lists.maptools.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/private/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@lists.maptools.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
X-UIDL: 000000000023ceae.00001e33
X-MSP-STORE: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 08:16:32 +0100
Status:   

Joris wrote:
> We don't really dissagree. I personally use the second option I
> enumerated, i.e. converting RGB to CIE Y and back to greyscale. That
> seems to be exactly what you propose. Is this an approximation, or is it
> 'actually correct'? I prefer to avoid these terms. Some people are bound
> to say CIE XYZ sucks and CIE L*a*b* is about as different from human
> vision as you can get. They may be right, they may be wrong. 

Sorry, I don't buy this "everybody's got an opinion" stuff when
it comes to things we can measure. You can quibble all you
like about whether the CIE observer curves are the best possible,
but the fact is that noone has come up with any alternatives
that are convincingly better in matching the measurements
in over 70 years. So Given an additive device like an RGB display,
we can prove that the CIE Y value is going to correspond as accurately
as we know how, to the equivalent monochrome intensity of
its RGB output.

Graeme Gill.
_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: Tiff@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
