Re: Questions about the UI at 1.8 gamma
Re: Questions about the UI at 1.8 gamma
- Subject: Re: Questions about the UI at 1.8 gamma
- From: John Zimmerer <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:13:38 -0700
Actually I've made this case many times.
The short story is:
1) A gamma of 1.8 roughly equals the transfer function of printed pages.
2) Many, if not most, images are ultimately printed on some output
device.
3) A gamma of 1.8 roughly equals the inverse of the human visual
response in average lighting.*
4) Most users view their displays in very bright environments.
JZ
*For a primer on how gamma correction is applied, see Poynton's FAQ:
http://www.poynton.com/GammaFAQ.html
On Jun 20, 2004, at 2:16 AM, neil snape wrote:
on 20/06/2004 10:48, John Zimmerer wrote :
The Macintosh user interface is designed for a 1.8 gamma, has been for
many, many years. The Apple displays are at 1.8 as well.
Yes that has been clear enough since the days of the Laser Writer.
The Apple Cinema display doesn't check in at 1.8 gamma native.
Forcing it
there has not worked often for most profilers so far.
I really want to know some advantages of 1.8 Gamma if there are any.
Your
group must have some reasons that have yet to be disclosed to the
users.
As you've recently said there are advantages to not presume sRGB. In
the
same enlightenment are there solid reasons for staying with 1.8 Gamma
after
creating a whole new completely Os level CM platform?
Neil Snape nsnape @ noos.fr neil_snape @ mac.com
http://mapage.noos.fr/nsnape
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.