"Rarius" <rar### [at] rariuscouk> wrote:
> I should have remembered the assumed_gamma issue before posting this... but
> on the other hand, why does this only cause a problem for the PNG output but
> not the BMP or TGA? And why does the render window look OK while the file
> doesn't?
>
> Personally I've never understood the need for Gamma adjustment within
> POVRay... I'd second any motion for ripping it out!
>
> Rarius
>
>
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
> news:45aab39c@news.povray.org...
> >  Gamma, gamma, gamma... Each time I read something about gamma, it's
> > a problem with it. It seems to me that gamma only causes problems and
> > doesn't actually solve any. There are tons and tons of graphical
> > software out there which do just *fine* without any gamma at all to
> > worry about.
> >
> >  How about if we dropped everything related to gamma from povray?
> > Who needs it anyways? It just fumbles things up and makes people
> > struggle because they can't get what they want.
> >  What is the most common thing people use assumed_gamma for in
> > povray 3.6? Trying to get rid of it! That's what.
> >
> >  Ok, I apologize for the ranting.
> >
> > --
> >                                                          - Warp


trouble than it is worth

Stephen

Post a reply to this message