Re: UGRA/UDACT-conforming displays [was: i1Display x i1Pro]
Re: UGRA/UDACT-conforming displays [was: i1Display x i1Pro]
- Subject: Re: UGRA/UDACT-conforming displays [was: i1Display x i1Pro]
- From: Koch Karl <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:20:03 +0200
Hi Marco et al,
What I was trying to explain was the theory behind it. I didn´t say
that the inevitable loss of steps per channel that occur when you
apply a non-linear non-45-degree transfer function, will be visible.
256 RGB values account for more than 16 million colors – more than the
human observer can distinguish. So, a certain loss can be tolerated.
But logic and mathematics prove that applying a non-linear non-45-
degree transfer function with the same number of input and output
values results in a loss of values. And, from a certain magnitude of
loss, this will be visible.
Conclusion
The ideal setup is: Same transfer functions from original to human
observer. Real life may be different without making a visible
difference ;-)
Best regards,
Karl
Am 01.04.2009 um 06:35 schrieb Marco Ugolini:
In a message dated 3/31/09 5:38 AM, Eric Nunn wrote:
Is this new advice? I have don't recall ever reading anything about
correlating monitor calibration to preferred working spaces before.
Me neither.
To make an example, I had never heard (or read) such a warning from
Bruce
Fraser.
Truth is, this is the first time I'm hearing such a thing from anyone.
To me, this doesn't sound right.
Marco Ugolini
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
@mac.com
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden