POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : Gamma 1.0 or bust! Server Time
5 Nov 2024 22:23:47 EST (-0500)
  Gamma 1.0 or bust! (Message 1 to 4 of 4)  
From: John M  Dlugosz
Subject: Gamma 1.0 or bust!
Date: 24 Mar 1999 23:56:39
Message: <36f9c207.0@news.povray.org>
I've updated my material at
http://www.dlugosz.com/POV/Gamma/POVscene.html#zones to show a first cut at
a psycologically uniform color scale.  Not quite there yet, but the idea
holds promise.  How's it look to y'all ?

--John


Post a reply to this message

From: Bob Hughes
Subject: Re: Gamma 1.0 or bust!
Date: 25 Mar 1999 00:33:47
Message: <36F9CAA8.A5DE7087@aol.com>
Page holds promise too.
I agree with your observation, that the 100% appears a jump from the
previous 82%. I was noticing also the illusion of light to dark within
each square too. Left looks brighter than the right due to the side by
side intensities. The human eye thing is pretty flimsy.
I'd be willing to bet the dark end is not as easily discernable as the
light end, contrary to the example stated in the quoted article.
Your equation shows a "γ" for me here, likewise at the end of the
page a "—" so I'm not seeing your intended symbols. "cometent"
(competent) needs a spell-check and "ttypical" in your code is probably
not right, I'm guessing.
That enough commentary out of me yet, so far? :)


"John M. Dlugosz" wrote:
> 
> I've updated my material at
> http://www.dlugosz.com/POV/Gamma/POVscene.html#zones to show a first cut at
> a psycologically uniform color scale.  Not quite there yet, but the idea
> holds promise.  How's it look to y'all ?
> 
> --John

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
 mailto:inv### [at] aolcom?Subject=PoV-News


Post a reply to this message

From: Daren Scot Wilson
Subject: Re: Gamma 1.0 or bust!
Date: 30 Mar 1999 00:56:32
Message: <370020CD.EF3B4B9@pipeline.com>
Good idea.

(quoted from your web page)
>  However,
> to my eye the middle has somewhat larger steps than either end,...

Hmmm, maybe, if I had a couple beers I could agree, but it's so slight, I'd
agree with "equal uniform steps all the way across", except right at the white
end.


> ...and
>  the rightmost step, from 82% to 100%, is anomalously large.

Agree.  But maybe not to the same degree as what you see - I wouldn't say
"anomalously large" but "somewhat greater".    Difference in words, or
differences in sight?   


People should state what kind of monitor they're using, esp. if not a standard
CRT monitor.

I'm looking at your page on a Philips 17" flat screen LCD display, a Brilliance
151AX.  Cost some $$$, but I love the space it saves, so much lighter to carry
around.  Sold the clunky old CRT monitor.  "Gamma" has a whole new meaning for
me now.  Colors look more saturated, but white-gray-black scales look very
good, details in shadows, details in highlights.  So good, I  am almost tempted
to stop working on my revision of the Unlimited Light patch....

-- 
Daren Scot Wilson
dar### [at] pipelinecom 
www.newcolor.com
----
"Do you think I'd eat those things? If you saw the poisons we put 
 on them you wouldn't ask that question. You'd never eat another..."  
                                                 -- a farmer


Post a reply to this message

From: Lance Birch
Subject: Re: Gamma 1.0 or bust!
Date: 30 Mar 1999 04:03:51
Message: <37009377.0@news.povray.org>
High quality LCDs have a way of really bringing color to life don't they?
:-)

What I REALLY want is an SGI Flat Screen LCD.  It's the new one they've just
brought out... IT'S SOOOOOOO COOOOOLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  OK, I think you
get the picture now... ;-)

--
Lance.


---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.