In article <cja### [at] netplexaussieorg>, 
cja### [at] earthlinknet says...
> In article <3edf63f2$1@news.povray.org>,
>  "Slashdolt" <jer### [at] questsoftwarecom> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for the information, and thanks to everyone else for providing input.
> > 
> > Howerver, if you look at <povray>\scenes\incdemo\woods\woods2.pov, they set
> > the "assumed_gamma" to 2.2.  If you use assumed_gamma 1.0 for any of the
> > T_Wood textures, they are way too bright, and many look purplish.  For that
> > reason, I generally don't use any of them, and create my own wood textures
> > instead.
> 
> Those textures probably predate versions of POV-Ray with gamma 
> correction. They were designed to look good on a screen with a gamma of 
> 2.2, so they are already "corrected" for that gamma, and applying the 
> gamma correction just screws them up. This is why you can use other 
> values for assumed_gamma: support of older scenes designed without gamma 
> correction. The include file should probably be corrected or at least 
> give a warning.
> 
> 

It should be noted as well that some things like 'Brown' when used in 
them seem to pre-date even decent VGA monitors (where the color was also 
squeezed into 8-bit color spaces), so the resulting color has about as 
much to do with real Brown as a modern cell phone does with a rotary 
dial. Unfortunately many of those colors propagate through programs 
because they are also part of the 665 standards in Linux, part of the 128 
or so in HTML, part of the list supplied with wxPython, etc. Twenty years 
ago the 'may' have looked right on whatever freaky display that they 
where used with, now they don't even accurately describe the original 
color they tried to produce. Most of those textures use those old 
standards and thus also look absolutely nothing like what they may have 
back then.

-- 
void main () {

    call functional_code()
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

Post a reply to this message