|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Am 20.12.2010 12:38, schrieb Kenneth:
>
> > Personally, I give this topic *much* thought--always comparing what I see
> > in real-life to what I see (or think I should see) on a computer screen and
> > in images that I make. It's an on-going process for me...
> A similar on-going process happens on the other side of the fence, btw.
No doubt! ;-) It can't be easy, trying to reconcile what might be considered an
'oil and water mix' of different philosophies and requests.
>
> Finally, here is one more fact: For some file formats (like PNG, OpenEXR
> and Radiance HDR), it is to the best of my knowledge /impossible/ to
> achieve a well-defined behaviour regarding gamma that suits both
> technical and artistic use of a single gamma-handling mechanism. Thus we
> /need/ a purely technical gamma handling mechanism if we want to support
> physical realism at all...
Yes, I do see the need for that--having to work by necessity with raw linear
lighting values, AFAIU, and over a *very* large numerical range. (In fact, it's
these particular issues that are driving me toward buying a new high-end camera,
to start experimenting with HDRI in POV-Ray.)
BTW, my ranting screed was most definitely not aimed in your direction, rest
assured. (Sorry if it sounded that way.) Keep those great ideas coming! ;-)
Ken
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |