Making per-image simulation profile
Cf. IRC and !633 (merged), !589 (merged), !627 (merged) and more. Copying this here for @NikcCDC who will work on this in the context of their CMYK improvements:
20:21 < NikcDC> Jehan: Sure thing. My concern was, because the JPEG plugin (and my proposed TIFF plugin) use the default simulation, there might be some confusion on export if they used a different soft-proofing profile during editing.
20:21 < Jehan> NikcDC: yeah but this is just temporary shit. What we need is to have a per-image simulation profile.
20:21 < Jehan> NikcDC: that's what I wanted to do.
20:21 < Jehan> Same as we have a per-image color profile.
20:22 < NikcDC> Jehan: Yes - I just wasn't sure if that was a "far future" change or a "near future" one. :)
20:22 < Jehan> NikcDC: why you use the default simulation profile is only because that's all we have right now.
20:22 < Jehan> NikcDC: near future one. I just need to make some time.
20:22 < Jehan> NikcDC: actually, do you want to work on this?
20:22 < Jehan> It can definitely be part of the CMYK support improvement.
20:24 < NikcDC> Jehan: Sure, I could try. It should work similar to the per-image color profile (e.g. I could model an implementation off that)?
20:24 < Jehan> NikcDC: basically (1) the GimpImage needs to keep track of its own profile data, (2) this profile is editable in Image > Color Management menu and (3) this data must be saved in the XCF format.
20:24 < Jehan> NikcDC: yes.
20:25 < Jehan> NikcDC: then (4) the simulation must use this profile, not the default profile anymore.
20:25 < Jehan> NikcDC: actually the view profile data should likely be dropped.
20:27 < NikcDC> Jehan: Okay, I'll start looking into that.
20:27 < Jehan> NikcDC: I'm trying to think. Should we just drop the whole "Color Management" menu in View? On the one hand, the concept is quite clean and clear. Now we are kind of leaking the view concept into the image concept.
20:27 < Jehan> On the other hand, the color management in Image menu is also view-related, so we were already leaking.
20:28 < Jehan> And having 2 menus (what we have right now) can be considered messy for many people.
20:28 < Jehan> I'm sure many people get lost 'why are there 2 "Color Management" menus?'.
20:29 < Jehan> In any case, we really need to start making this leak happen. Believing that view and image concepts are completely separate is true for some parts (canvas rotation, zoom, etc.) but definitely not regarding the color management.
20:35 < Jehan> NikcDC: when you add the support to simulation profile in XCF, make so it can be a list of profiles.
20:35 < Jehan> NikcDC: i.e. that we will only store 1 profile for now, but in theory, the format should allow to store several simulation profiles.
20:36 < Jehan> NikcDC: doing this will allow us not to have to bump the format later if we add the ability for several views of an image.
20:37 < Jehan> NikcDC: actually we could add the "views" concept into the XCF too, in a way which is evolutive.
20:37 < Jehan> NikcDC: same as the XCF format itself is (evolutive).
20:37 < NikcDC> Jehan: Okay - should it also be labelled in some way (e.g. your concept of multiple views, so we might have a "Simulation (Paper)", "Simulation (Metal)", in the future)?
20:38 < Jehan> NikcDC: well you can add a title label to the view. It just won't be used right now.
20:39 < Jehan> NikcDC: or yeah just make so the format allows to add other fields which we don't think of right now.
20:39 < Jehan> NikcDC: read devel-docs/specifications/xcf.txt
20:39 < NikcDC> Jehan: Yep, that's what I meant.
20:40 < Jehan> NikcDC: you'll understand how the XCF format is stored right now, and you'll see how it can be easily evolutive.
Opening this report to follow evolution.
Edited by Jehan