Date   

Re: icc profile for photoshop

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

Haha I don't think you could dangle such a tantalizing carrot in front of us and not expect us to bite ;)

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Haarm-Pieter Duiker <li...@...> wrote:
Count me as interested. It would be very helpful if the ICC generation capabilities of OCIO could handle HDR input ranges and wide color gamuts. 

HP




On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:19 PM 'Lars Borg' via OpenColorIO Developers <ocio...@...> wrote:
Hi Kevin,



Well, I had planned to write a longer mail, but it got sent prematurely.



Here is a longer version:



Is there any interest in creating WCG/HDR-ready ICC profiles within OCIO?



The current set of ICC profiles from OCIO (I looked at the ones created

for ACES

1.0.3) has some short-comings in current workflows and that we should

consider addressing. Here's my list:



1. The profile’s PCS space is too small, just Lab.

   The ICC specification states that compliant implementations (CMMs)

shall constrain (clip) conversions to the ICC Lab range. The ICC Lab range

is 0..100 for L, and -128..+128 for a and b. This space was sufficient for

printing.

  It is not sufficient for say Rec. 2020. For Rec. 2020 the green corner

is outside ICC’s Lab range. This is easily shown in a ColorSync plot.

Other spaces that support colors (already in SDR mode) wider than ICC Lab

includes ACES, ACEScc,ACEScg, ARRI LogC, Sony S-Gamut,

   Now it might not matter to you as today all your colors are inside the

P3 space and (SDR) P3 fits completely within ICC Lab range.

   Another aspect that saves the day is that not all CMMs are ICC

compliant. Some CMMs support intermediate values outside the Lab range.

But now you’re relying heavily on deviations from the spec.





2. The profile is an SDR profile, not supporting any HDR content or HDR

displays.

   Lab maxes out at ACES diffuse white (100). When applying RRT ODT to

ACES HDR shots, this (in a compliant CMM) clips the specular highlights.

   Constrained XYZ gives us 2x headroom. Not much but should give us less

clipping.

   However, we can use ICC profiles in non-constrained mode, extrapolating

into HDR space. Marti Maria (lcms) suggested this years ago, and we’ve

been doing this since 2006. All but 3D LUTs can be extrapolated. We’re now

routinely creating HDR profiles for HDR TV, log cinema spaces, etc.



Interested?



Lars Borg

Adobe



--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: icc profile for photoshop

Haarm-Pieter Duiker <li...@...>
 

Count me as interested. It would be very helpful if the ICC generation capabilities of OCIO could handle HDR input ranges and wide color gamuts. 

HP




On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:19 PM 'Lars Borg' via OpenColorIO Developers <ocio...@...> wrote:
Hi Kevin,



Well, I had planned to write a longer mail, but it got sent prematurely.



Here is a longer version:



Is there any interest in creating WCG/HDR-ready ICC profiles within OCIO?



The current set of ICC profiles from OCIO (I looked at the ones created

for ACES

1.0.3) has some short-comings in current workflows and that we should

consider addressing. Here's my list:



1. The profile’s PCS space is too small, just Lab.

   The ICC specification states that compliant implementations (CMMs)

shall constrain (clip) conversions to the ICC Lab range. The ICC Lab range

is 0..100 for L, and -128..+128 for a and b. This space was sufficient for

printing.

  It is not sufficient for say Rec. 2020. For Rec. 2020 the green corner

is outside ICC’s Lab range. This is easily shown in a ColorSync plot.

Other spaces that support colors (already in SDR mode) wider than ICC Lab

includes ACES, ACEScc,ACEScg, ARRI LogC, Sony S-Gamut,

   Now it might not matter to you as today all your colors are inside the

P3 space and (SDR) P3 fits completely within ICC Lab range.

   Another aspect that saves the day is that not all CMMs are ICC

compliant. Some CMMs support intermediate values outside the Lab range.

But now you’re relying heavily on deviations from the spec.





2. The profile is an SDR profile, not supporting any HDR content or HDR

displays.

   Lab maxes out at ACES diffuse white (100). When applying RRT ODT to

ACES HDR shots, this (in a compliant CMM) clips the specular highlights.

   Constrained XYZ gives us 2x headroom. Not much but should give us less

clipping.

   However, we can use ICC profiles in non-constrained mode, extrapolating

into HDR space. Marti Maria (lcms) suggested this years ago, and we’ve

been doing this since 2006. All but 3D LUTs can be extrapolated. We’re now

routinely creating HDR profiles for HDR TV, log cinema spaces, etc.



Interested?



Lars Borg

Adobe



--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+u...@....

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: icc profile for photoshop

Lars Borg <bo...@...>
 

Hi Kevin,

Well, I had planned to write a longer mail, but it got sent prematurely.

Here is a longer version:

Is there any interest in creating WCG/HDR-ready ICC profiles within OCIO?

The current set of ICC profiles from OCIO (I looked at the ones created
for ACES
1.0.3) has some short-comings in current workflows and that we should
consider addressing. Here's my list:

1. The profile’s PCS space is too small, just Lab.
The ICC specification states that compliant implementations (CMMs)
shall constrain (clip) conversions to the ICC Lab range. The ICC Lab range
is 0..100 for L, and -128..+128 for a and b. This space was sufficient for
printing.
It is not sufficient for say Rec. 2020. For Rec. 2020 the green corner
is outside ICC’s Lab range. This is easily shown in a ColorSync plot.
Other spaces that support colors (already in SDR mode) wider than ICC Lab
includes ACES, ACEScc,ACEScg, ARRI LogC, Sony S-Gamut,
Now it might not matter to you as today all your colors are inside the
P3 space and (SDR) P3 fits completely within ICC Lab range.
Another aspect that saves the day is that not all CMMs are ICC
compliant. Some CMMs support intermediate values outside the Lab range.
But now you’re relying heavily on deviations from the spec.


2. The profile is an SDR profile, not supporting any HDR content or HDR
displays.
Lab maxes out at ACES diffuse white (100). When applying RRT ODT to
ACES HDR shots, this (in a compliant CMM) clips the specular highlights.
Constrained XYZ gives us 2x headroom. Not much but should give us less
clipping.
However, we can use ICC profiles in non-constrained mode, extrapolating
into HDR space. Marti Maria (lcms) suggested this years ago, and we’ve
been doing this since 2006. All but 3D LUTs can be extrapolated. We’re now
routinely creating HDR profiles for HDR TV, log cinema spaces, etc.

Interested?

Lars Borg
Adobe


Re: icc profile for photoshop

Kevin Wheatley <kevin.j....@...>
 

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 3:59 AM, <lrs...@...> wrote:
Now's the time to make better ICC profiles ?!

The current set of ICC profiles (I looked at the ones created for ACES
1.0.3) has some short-comings in current workflows and that we should
consider addressing. Here's my list:

- The PCS space is Lab. This is too small for current projects. Lab is
smaller than Rec. 2020. Several corners of the 202 cube get clipped by Lab.

Whilst I'm don't think OCIO has perfect ICC support, I'm not sure
what you propose is even possible. Last time I read the ICC
specifications the only options for profile connection space are
L*a*b* and XYZ, neither of which have any limits which prevent you
using 2020 gamut - I certainly have profiles using ACES AP1 which is
wider than 2020. Could you describe what you are trying to do?

As a random guess are you perhaps relying on the inbuilt sRGB display
profile, when really you need a wider one?

Kevin


ACES 1.0.2 and 1.0.3 configs in the Sony repo

Haarm-Pieter Duiker <li...@...>
 

Hello OCIO-ers,

The ACES 1.0.2 and 1.0.3 configs were accepted into the main OCIO repo this weekend.

The 1.0.3 config includes the latest 1.0.3 transforms, including the sRGB Output Transform, some updates to organization that should be helpful to newcomers and updates to the Input Transforms for ARRI, Canon and Red.

One thing to note, the names of a few colorspaces changed as follow:
  • 'ADX - ADX10' became 'Input - ADX - ADX10'
  • 'ADX - ADX16' became 'Input - ADX - ADX16'
  • 'Input - ARRI - Linear - ARRI Wide Gamut' became 'Input - ARRI - Linear - ALEXA Wide Gamut'
  • The 'logc3eiXXX_arriwide' spaces became 'logc3eiXXX_alexawide'
Please post OCIO-specific issues here and ACES-specific issues on acescentral.com

Thanks!
HP





Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Larry Gritz <l...@...>
 

TravisCI supports OSX and Linux.



On January 17, 2017 5:56:34 AM PST, Ben De Luca <bd...@...> wrote:
Absolutely pick the best thing, the only real benefit to what I am providing is I can give you exactly the environment that you want if its not provided by one of the cloudy tools. I don't believe any of them supported OSX. 

Its would be running on my virtual CI infrastructure.   

On 16 January 2017 at 23:52, Larry Gritz <l...@...> wrote:
I don't have any Jenkins experience, but Travis is pretty straightforward and I've really come to rely on it for my open source projects. It's a big boost to know before you merge something that it's been built and passes tests on a matrix of several platforms, compilers, and build options. Well worth the time investment to get it set up. Appveyor is also helpful as the rough equivalent on Windows.


On Jan 16, 2017, at 1:31 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:

@ben, though iId look into the other contributors opinion on TravisCI vs. Jenkins

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
That would be great if you have the cycles!


--
Larry Gritz
l...@...


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
Larry Gritz
l...@...


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Ben De Luca <bde...@...>
 

Absolutely pick the best thing, the only real benefit to what I am providing is I can give you exactly the environment that you want if its not provided by one of the cloudy tools. I don't believe any of them supported OSX. 

Its would be running on my virtual CI infrastructure.   

On 16 January 2017 at 23:52, Larry Gritz <l...@...> wrote:
I don't have any Jenkins experience, but Travis is pretty straightforward and I've really come to rely on it for my open source projects. It's a big boost to know before you merge something that it's been built and passes tests on a matrix of several platforms, compilers, and build options. Well worth the time investment to get it set up. Appveyor is also helpful as the rough equivalent on Windows.


On Jan 16, 2017, at 1:31 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:

@ben, though iId look into the other contributors opinion on TravisCI vs. Jenkins

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
That would be great if you have the cycles!


--
Larry Gritz
l...@...


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Larry Gritz <l...@...>
 

I don't have any Jenkins experience, but Travis is pretty straightforward and I've really come to rely on it for my open source projects. It's a big boost to know before you merge something that it's been built and passes tests on a matrix of several platforms, compilers, and build options. Well worth the time investment to get it set up. Appveyor is also helpful as the rough equivalent on Windows.


On Jan 16, 2017, at 1:31 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:

@ben, though iId look into the other contributors opinion on TravisCI vs. Jenkins

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
That would be great if you have the cycles!


--
Larry Gritz
l...@...



Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

@ben, though iId look into the other contributors opinion on TravisCI vs. Jenkins

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
That would be great if you have the cycles!


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

That would be great if you have the cycles!


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Ben De Luca <bde...@...>
 

On the CI front I can provide windows Linux and mac systems plus Jenkins if you want. 



On Fri., 13 Jan. 2017 at 1:40 am, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
Whoops, try giving it another go

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...> wrote:
You probably have to move the file to your personal gmail.  Google docs are not view-able outside of our domain either.

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...> wrote:
You need permission

This form can only be viewed by users in the owner's organization.

Try contacting the owner of the form if you think this is a mistake. Learn More.


On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
Here is a form to get an invite for the OpenColorIO Slack channel, I'll add them manually from there. We're looking to keep it to the smaller group of core owners/contributors, though feel free to invite whomever you think would help the cause!

https://goo.gl/forms/Lq9buvEJg2qzJzq03








--


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.


To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+u...@....


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.














--


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.


To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+u...@....


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.











--


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.


To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+u...@....


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

Whoops, try giving it another go

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...> wrote:
You probably have to move the file to your personal gmail.  Google docs are not view-able outside of our domain either.

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...> wrote:
You need permission

This form can only be viewed by users in the owner's organization.

Try contacting the owner of the form if you think this is a mistake. Learn More.


On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
Here is a form to get an invite for the OpenColorIO Slack channel, I'll add them manually from there. We're looking to keep it to the smaller group of core owners/contributors, though feel free to invite whomever you think would help the cause!

https://goo.gl/forms/Lq9buvEJg2qzJzq03

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...>
 

You probably have to move the file to your personal gmail.  Google docs are not view-able outside of our domain either.

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...> wrote:
You need permission

This form can only be viewed by users in the owner's organization.

Try contacting the owner of the form if you think this is a mistake. Learn More.


On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
Here is a form to get an invite for the OpenColorIO Slack channel, I'll add them manually from there. We're looking to keep it to the smaller group of core owners/contributors, though feel free to invite whomever you think would help the cause!

https://goo.gl/forms/Lq9buvEJg2qzJzq03

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Deke Kincaid <dekek...@...>
 

You need permission

This form can only be viewed by users in the owner's organization.

Try contacting the owner of the form if you think this is a mistake. Learn More.


On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
Here is a form to get an invite for the OpenColorIO Slack channel, I'll add them manually from there. We're looking to keep it to the smaller group of core owners/contributors, though feel free to invite whomever you think would help the cause!

https://goo.gl/forms/Lq9buvEJg2qzJzq03

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

Here is a form to get an invite for the OpenColorIO Slack channel, I'll add them manually from there. We're looking to keep it to the smaller group of core owners/contributors, though feel free to invite whomever you think would help the cause!

https://goo.gl/forms/Lq9buvEJg2qzJzq03


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

Thanks, yeah I should have linked the PR in the post. I'll try and get more eyes on that to test, though I'm sure it's fine, then we can pull that through to get things kicked off.

As for Labels, I'd just like to get a better organizational structure that guides users attention a little better. My gut feeling is pushing towards a slimmed down version of this: https://medium.com/@dave_lunny/sane-github-labels-c5d2e6004b63#.3kx74xshg


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

dbr/Ben <dbr....@...>
 

This all sounds good to me!

I would be happy to help out auditing/tagging the issues in GitHub. 

The current labels seem fairly reasonable to me - "feature" for new things, "bug" for bugs, internal for non-user-impacting things, a label to flag API breaking changes, and "deferred" for future things. I'd probably add tags for performance improvements, docs, and build related issues. Then along side these, maybe tags for tag "easy" quick-to-fix issues, low/high priority tags)

Regarding CI, There is a pull request to fix up the TravisCI config (#415). It would also be worth investigating Appveyor to test on Windows also

Sent from my phone

On 12 Jan 2017, at 11:12, Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:

Hello all, and happy new year!

I'd like to start a formal discussion around the steps we will take to give OCIO a breath of life. Hopefully we can work to make 2017 a year of progress. So in that spirit I'd like to layout a general game plan for comment and discussion.

General Notes:
  • Reading through our last discussion I found it troubling that due to the stalled public development, conversations and progress seemed to have moved behind closed doors. To facilitate openness I advise all contributors to relegate conversation to either the GitHub issues or this forum. I have created an OpenColorIO Slack channel if there needs to be quick group conversation among contributors, but the majority of conversation should be relegated to this forum.
  • I have been granted ownership to the GitHub repo, and can accomplish administrative tasks as necessary. I do not intend to accept Pull Requests in isolation, both due to the need for public discourse and my unfamiliarity with the codebase.
  • Development should continue in a "master-only" fashion, based on the previous branch/merge patterns and at the suggestion of Larry Gritz

Game Plan:

  • Organization
    • Project Owners
      • This is no slight to the current owners of OCIO, but would it be worth it to revisit the current owners and identify their level of involvement moving forward (based on interest and free time available)? It could be beneficial to add vocal / active developers to the helm of the project. Discussion welcomed.
    • Issues
      • Need to create a better issue labeling scheme, and need to maintain it's use. Suggestions welcome.
      • Are issues irrelevant / duplicates?
      • Do PRs solve specific issues?
      • Asses difficulty in solving
    • Pull Requests
      • Are they still relevant?
      • Rank in order of usefulness
      • Determine order of integration
  • Repository
    • Continuous Integration
      • In order to begin pulling a larger volume of Pull Requests, we need to update the CI system in use.
      • Alongside this is a reevaluation of the OCIO unit tests
    • Make private forks public
      • Address private forks with additional features (Dennis Adams, Mark Boorer, etc.)
      • Get them posted publicly, work into pull request
  • Road to 2.0
    • What are the dream requests?
    • How do we want to interact with OCIO in 5 years?
    • What movements on the horizon do we need to begin working towards?
    • What features would improve adoption in modern software?
Order of Attack:
  • Issue Labels
  • Easy PR with greatest image quality impact
  • Website + Documentation
    • Up to date? Documentation still relevant?
    • Website on version 1.0.8
  • Continuous Integration
  • PR review
  • Issue solving
  • Live, Long and Prosper

Please join me in conversation about the future of OCIO! All of the above is open to suggestion and critique.

Sean

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+u...@....
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

A) Providing metadata on the chromaticities for each Display cluster, or possibly per View?
B) Providing metadata on the reference chromaticities.
C) Provide some form of metadata that differentiates the transfer function portion of a view transform from any other colorimetric transforms. This would be needed for colour pickers and other things, where one needs to know the colorimetry of the reference and the destination, as well as how to apply *only* the transfer function to the UI element, post transform. Gradient UIs, color pickers, coloured sliders, etc.

Troy, would you be able to wrap this into an Issue on GH? With the coming addition of labels, this will be classified as a feature request.

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Troy Sobotka <troy.s...@...> wrote:


On Wed, Jan 11, 2017, 5:42 PM Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
  • Road to 2.0
    • What are the dream requests?

On a practical "get things done with the library" sense, it would be excellent to deal with OCIO for colour managing UI elements.

Having spent plenty of time ramming into the problems, I believe that can be elegantly accomplished by:

A) Providing metadata on the chromaticities for each Display cluster, or possibly per View?
B) Providing metadata on the reference chromaticities.
C) Provide some form of metadata that differentiates the transfer function portion of a view transform from any other colorimetric transforms. This would be needed for colour pickers and other things, where one needs to know the colorimetry of the reference and the destination, as well as how to apply *only* the transfer function to the UI element, post transform. Gradient UIs, color pickers, coloured sliders, etc.

Many transforms are going to be of the transfer function variety, and it makes sense to tackle UI in the least invasive manner possible, hence limiting the metadata to the fewest possible areas makes sense? Per transform seems overkill unless a sane metadata structure can be arrived at that wraps up the needs.

With respect,
TJS

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocio-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: OCIO - Path Forward

Troy Sobotka <troy.s...@...>
 



On Wed, Jan 11, 2017, 5:42 PM Sean Cooper <se...@...> wrote:
  • Road to 2.0
    • What are the dream requests?

On a practical "get things done with the library" sense, it would be excellent to deal with OCIO for colour managing UI elements.

Having spent plenty of time ramming into the problems, I believe that can be elegantly accomplished by:

A) Providing metadata on the chromaticities for each Display cluster, or possibly per View?
B) Providing metadata on the reference chromaticities.
C) Provide some form of metadata that differentiates the transfer function portion of a view transform from any other colorimetric transforms. This would be needed for colour pickers and other things, where one needs to know the colorimetry of the reference and the destination, as well as how to apply *only* the transfer function to the UI element, post transform. Gradient UIs, color pickers, coloured sliders, etc.

Many transforms are going to be of the transfer function variety, and it makes sense to tackle UI in the least invasive manner possible, hence limiting the metadata to the fewest possible areas makes sense? Per transform seems overkill unless a sane metadata structure can be arrived at that wraps up the needs.

With respect,
TJS


OCIO - Path Forward

Sean Cooper <se...@...>
 

Hello all, and happy new year!

I'd like to start a formal discussion around the steps we will take to give OCIO a breath of life. Hopefully we can work to make 2017 a year of progress. So in that spirit I'd like to layout a general game plan for comment and discussion.

General Notes:
  • Reading through our last discussion I found it troubling that due to the stalled public development, conversations and progress seemed to have moved behind closed doors. To facilitate openness I advise all contributors to relegate conversation to either the GitHub issues or this forum. I have created an OpenColorIO Slack channel if there needs to be quick group conversation among contributors, but the majority of conversation should be relegated to this forum.
  • I have been granted ownership to the GitHub repo, and can accomplish administrative tasks as necessary. I do not intend to accept Pull Requests in isolation, both due to the need for public discourse and my unfamiliarity with the codebase.
  • Development should continue in a "master-only" fashion, based on the previous branch/merge patterns and at the suggestion of Larry Gritz

Game Plan:

  • Organization
    • Project Owners
      • This is no slight to the current owners of OCIO, but would it be worth it to revisit the current owners and identify their level of involvement moving forward (based on interest and free time available)? It could be beneficial to add vocal / active developers to the helm of the project. Discussion welcomed.
    • Issues
      • Need to create a better issue labeling scheme, and need to maintain it's use. Suggestions welcome.
      • Are issues irrelevant / duplicates?
      • Do PRs solve specific issues?
      • Asses difficulty in solving
    • Pull Requests
      • Are they still relevant?
      • Rank in order of usefulness
      • Determine order of integration
  • Repository
    • Continuous Integration
      • In order to begin pulling a larger volume of Pull Requests, we need to update the CI system in use.
      • Alongside this is a reevaluation of the OCIO unit tests
    • Make private forks public
      • Address private forks with additional features (Dennis Adams, Mark Boorer, etc.)
      • Get them posted publicly, work into pull request
  • Road to 2.0
    • What are the dream requests?
    • How do we want to interact with OCIO in 5 years?
    • What movements on the horizon do we need to begin working towards?
    • What features would improve adoption in modern software?
Order of Attack:
  • Issue Labels
  • Easy PR with greatest image quality impact
  • Website + Documentation
    • Up to date? Documentation still relevant?
    • Website on version 1.0.8
  • Continuous Integration
  • PR review
  • Issue solving
  • Live, Long and Prosper

Please join me in conversation about the future of OCIO! All of the above is open to suggestion and critique.

Sean

701 - 720 of 2233