|
 |
"St." <dot### [at] dot com> wrote in message news:464c7fdb$1@news.povray.org...
>
> That's all there is apart from Wings models and some PovTree's. As it is
> now, the scene looks quite good and I'm happy with it, I'm just not
> getting the assumed_gamma thing. It's confusing me because it should
> either be 2.2 or 1 (from what I've read). FWIW, nearly all of my images
> over the last two years use a low assumed_gamma. Where am I going wrong
> with this?
assumed_gamma should be 1 for the best simulation of light. Povray will
gamma correct the image from the "assumed" gamma to the "actual" gamma which
is stored in one of it's ini files. The ini file value is 2.2 so if you want
no gamma correction use the (default) assumed_gamma 2.2. But, light by
definition has linear gamma, whereas monitors have non-linear gamma (50%
grey is not half the brightness of white on a monitor), so assumed_gamma 1
tells pov to do all it's maths as if they have a gamma of 1, then to
implicitly correct that to a gamma of 2.2 for the image. It's VERY counter
intuitive!
I've tried your source with a simple scene and I can't get any blue.
assumed_gamma won't be the cause, it will just be adjusting the brightness
of the error. Has anything in the scene got negative colour values? e.g.
negative ambient light?
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
