> Ive <"ive### [at] lilysoftorg"> wrote:
>> A quick note about Photoshop and it's PNG support:
>> I'm using Photoshop since version 4.0 and currently CS3 (still not sure
>> about updating to CS4) and every version had broken PNG support in one
>> way or another. Usually the gamma and sRGB chunk was ignored, some
>> version did completely mess up 16 bps images and CS3 writes colorimetric
>> chunks (color primaries and whitepoint) but 'forgets' to add the gamma
>> chunk (and it claims when saving to PNG that this file format does not
>> support any metadata - a plain lie because PNG even supports XMP, the
>> way that is favored by Adobe itself for storing metadata).
>> Given the long time and that PNG is a quite simple format it seems not
>> that far fetched that PNG support is broken deliberately - as some
>> people claim - but I fail to see the reason behind it.
> Yes - it should write the gamma chunk when adding profile. It says so in the
> I think PNG has never been a "pro" format in terms of their production
> customers, so Adobe hasn't given it the love. I don't think it's anything more
> sinister than that.
> Photoshop 4? Pah - luxury! I started using version 2.0 - it didn't even have
Photoshop 2.0? Pah, in fact I started with Aldus Photo-Styler. Aldus was
later 'consumed' by Adobe (a company that had nothing to do with image
processing at this time) and Photoshop 1.0 was nothing but the Aldus
Photo-Styler with a new name. I had some break in my life back then and
did start to make a living as musician but returned to IT business when
Photoshop 4.0 was out.
And BTW Aldus did also maintain the TIFF specification and so it
happened that the TIFF specs are now 'owned' by Adobe and the latest
revision 6.0 is from 1992 (!!!) even if Adobe has greatly extended the
format simply by adding lots of new features regarding TIFF into
Post a reply to this message