Difference between revisions of "Talk:GIMP/CMYK support"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(possibly misleading statement on lack of CMY import: new section)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
Okay, so I was able to confirm that CMYK images created by separate are valid. Scribus, however, doesn't handle them well. Too bad. Kind of beats the purpose.
 
Okay, so I was able to confirm that CMYK images created by separate are valid. Scribus, however, doesn't handle them well. Too bad. Kind of beats the purpose.
 +
 +
== possibly misleading statement on lack of CMY import ==
 +
 +
"there is no support for opening CMYK files in either Separate or Separate+."
 +
 +
but http://registry.gimp.org/node/471 mentions
 +
 +
separate_import (bonus)
 +
    CMYK TIFF import plug-in which generates the pseudo-composite image
 +
 +
-- should this be noted in the article? --[[User:Unhammer|Unhammer]] 02:49, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

Revision as of 06:49, 13 September 2011

It feels kind of funny to argue with the original author, since I wrote this one... :) Anyway, the separate plugin may be BROKEN. So if you find a fix, please tell me. --foxbunny 20:04, 25 November 2006 (EST)

Okay, so I was able to confirm that CMYK images created by separate are valid. Scribus, however, doesn't handle them well. Too bad. Kind of beats the purpose.

possibly misleading statement on lack of CMY import

"there is no support for opening CMYK files in either Separate or Separate+."

but http://registry.gimp.org/node/471 mentions

separate_import (bonus)
   CMYK TIFF import plug-in which generates the pseudo-composite image

-- should this be noted in the article? --Unhammer 02:49, 13 September 2011 (EDT)