Stand-alone app?

If you have an idea for a new feature or other improvement to Curvemeister, this is the place to propose, discuss, and even vote on it. All suggestions are welcome, even the ones that are impossible!
mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4925
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:18 pm

Hello from a fellow ACT-member, Mike!

I've seen your comments over the years about the possibility of a Mac version of Curvemeister, and I've abandoned all hope that it will ever happen. So how about a stand-alone Windows app version, but sufficiently standards-based (i.e., no Microsoft "shenanigans") to run under Wine, so I could use it under CrossOver Mac? (The boss won't spring for redundant Windows versions of Photoshop.)

Crossover Mac or some other incarnation of Wine is all that is allowed on our Macs. Due to the threat to National Security, our company policy expressly prohibits the full Windows OS. But merely having Wine's white-room-emulated Windows APIs libraries will pass muster, inasmuch as they are immune to all Windows hacks, viruses, malware, etc.

Would it be fairly easy to put Curvemeister into even a crude shell app? No frills, just something that will open an image and preview the curves.

--
Thanks for listening,
George Machen


-default
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 1:53 am

Postby -default » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:50 am

I've been getting an increasing number of requests for a Mac version, not only from Macintosh folks, but from former Windows users who migrate to the Mac, and then want to continue to use Curvemeister.

Although I had considered a stand alone version initially, I hadn't thought of this as a way to provide some curves functionality to Macintosh folks, so this is a new consideration.  Since curvemeister uses a lot of Photoshop's functionality, the amount of work is not trivial - though it would be easier than a full port.

One thought would be to use Elements, which supports Curvemeister perfectly well at a fraction of the cost of Photoshop.


mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4925
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Sat Jul 03, 2010 5:29 am

A second vote for such a stand alone version of Curvemeister--but for quite different reasons (maybe more like the original reason?).  :'(

-default
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 1:53 am

Postby -default » Sat Jul 03, 2010 3:23 pm

You know, it's been a while since I visited this thread, so long that it seems like a fresh new idea again! 

The big problem is the ancillary support for color space conversions to Lab and CMYK mode, support for various masking operations, file formats, etc.  But these are much less work than porting Curvemeister to the mac platform.  I can't promise anything at this point, but hmmmm...

leeharper_admin
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:39 pm

Postby leeharper_admin » Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:27 pm

In terms of color space conversion, I think that for me this would be the biggest benefit of working outside of Photoshop's framework. I would love CurveMeister to use Bruce Lindbloom's Uniform Perceptual Lab color space (www.brucelindbloom.com), rather than the version of Lab that Adobe use. Jacob Rus has also been discussing the shortfalls of the color modes available in Photoshop on Dan Margulis' Advanced Color Theory mailing list lately. I know that Jacob is a member of this forum - I wonder what advice he might have in this regard.

In terms of implementing the Uniform Perceptual Lab color space, you could use Little CMS (www.littlecms.com) as the standalone CMM.

I think that turning CurveMeister into a standalone application would allow you to make it vastly more powerful - and therefore more useful, and more attractive to new users.

Lee.

-default
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 1:53 am

Postby -default » Sun Jul 04, 2010 7:07 pm

Good point - in fact I have been playing with littlecms, and it works quite well, and .NET will provide support for file formats that were not available when Curvemeister was written (has it been 10 years???  No, couldn't possibly...)  .  This would also allow me to run as a plugin in non-Adobe apps such as PaintShop Pro that do not support Lab.

At the same time, I've got my hands full just getting 64 bit mode to work more reliably on more systems, so I'm not in a position to promise anything at this point.

leeharper_admin
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:39 pm

Postby leeharper_admin » Mon Jul 05, 2010 7:42 am

I was thinking more about this last night, and I think as a selling point: CurveMeister already does CMYK better than Photoshop; it does HSB, which Photoshop hasn't done for years (I know there is a plugin to enable the mode, but it is a pain in the neck - CM does this much better). CurveMeister should also be able to boast that it does Lab better than Photoshop too.

I know that you're in no position to promise anything, but I think that positioning CurveMeister as a tool to use instead of Photoshop because the quality is better is a compelling direction to take.

All the best,
Lee.

-default
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 1:53 am

Postby -default » Mon Jul 05, 2010 8:02 am

You're definitely making a very good case here, Lee.

mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4925
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:23 pm

I just read Reinhard's post about RGBW (www.curvemeister.com/forum/index.php/topic,2231.0.html) and I think that it wraps up the point that I wanted to make about CurveMeister 4 providing better color spaces than Photoshop.



  • RGB: RGBW

  • CMYK: wgCMYK

  • Lab: Uniform Perceptual Lab

  • HSB



If you give us these color spaces then CurveMeister repositions itself in everyone's workflow. It moves from being a convenient tool that enables us to work more quickly (and more experimentally), to becoming an essential aspect of our workflow - because it enables us to do things that we simply cannot do any other way.

Again, I know that you cannot commit to anything, but I'm really excited by the possibilities that this opens up.
Lee  ;)

ggroess
Posts: 5342
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 2:15 am
Contact:

Postby ggroess » Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:39 pm

Sorry Mike....  8)

How about drawing on the masks in CM rather than PS?
How about adjustable mask feathering rather than 3 choices?
How about separate channel sliders for saturation adjustment in LAB; Linked and unlinked?
How about channel blur in LAB to help manage color noise?
How about zooming into the A and B channels to allow more precise control over the color adjustment; getting closer to the center where the color really lives.
HDR file Support?
Build in B&W conversion help.

I'll add my vote to the stand alone app pile. 

It would make the various versions of PS a moot point.  You would only have to support the OS's.  Driver support would not be dependent on Adobe...I would suggest you look at the Portrait Professional program as a work flow model.  You open in PS...Open the Portrait professional plug in and the program takes the image from Photoshop.  This is a stand alone App with an 8BF to get you into the work flow faster.  I can show you with a screen share if you'd like...

Greg




Return to “Vote on and Discuss New Features”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests