Thanks! From what I sense here, assumed_gamma 1 actually *activates* a gamma
correction of 2.2 in the output file, where the default assumed_gamma 2.2
becomes nothing because it gets divided with display_gamma 2.2.

Oh man! So instead of simulating gamma correction myself by using ordinary
rgb values, I should let the computer do this.. Yes, I understand this now!
Old rgb values should be ^ with 2.2 to get the new values ... but maybe it's
not so simple with finishs.. hmm.. but thank you!

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message

In article <3c98aca7$1@news.povray.org>, "Hugo" <hua### [at] post3teledk> 
wrote:

> Thanks! From what I sense here, assumed_gamma 1 actually *activates* a gamma
> correction of 2.2 in the output file, where the default assumed_gamma 2.2
> becomes nothing because it gets divided with display_gamma 2.2.
> 
> Oh man! So instead of simulating gamma correction myself by using ordinary
> rgb values, I should let the computer do this.. Yes, I understand this now!
> Old rgb values should be ^ with 2.2 to get the new values ... but maybe it's
> not so simple with finishs.. hmm.. but thank you!

With the finish statements that specify a brightness (reflection, 
ambient, diffuse, phong, specular), it should be similar. With 
statements that specify a size or falloff (brilliance, roughness, 
phong_size), it would be like "gamma correcting" the radius of a sphere, 
which is of course nonsense.
And don't forget your lights.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

I made the bumps a bit smaller and got a perfect desktop. Again simplicity
is beautiful. Thanks, Jonathan.  :)

Ari-Matti

Post a reply to this message