|
|
Am 10/28/2020 um 2:43 schrieb Bald Eagle:
>
> And to be fair - we've had formula errors lurking in the source for ~25 years
> without anyone noticing.... so...
>
> ;)
>
I hope you did not get me wrong. I was not criticizing you - having been
a programmer once I know very well how easily it happens, but I think in
former times, mistakes here were quickly spotted. But maybe I'm just
idealizing the past, like old men often do...
To me it was obvious by just looking at the formula that the linear part
of the function is no longer the tangent to the exponential part for any
M <> 1. This did surprise me because you already did switch away from
the official sRGB gamma correction formula that also has a very small
gap and makes no perfect tangent. Something that did annoy me since the
very first draft for sRGB by HP and Microsoft.
>
> Thanks, Ive, for catching this and pointing it out.
> I'll have to go back to it again and not be so lax in double-triple checking,
> back-checking, and graphing the results.
No problem, take your time.
>
> I of course would love to hear any commentary you might have on mapping the
> lighting and image and pigment curves to each other....
>
Well, now I have read through the whole thread. What a mess. There are
so many false statements, combined with completely correct statements
and - as usually - the worst ones: almost true statements.
And then are the things that are simply not relevant anymore (like the
whole discussion with Warp - Clipka expanded the color_map syntax so
that none of the complains is still valid).
So frankly, looking back at the whole thread, I really don't know where
to begin. But if you have any concrete questions, just ask away...
-Ive
-
Post a reply to this message
|
|