On 14 Apr 2003 16:53:33 -0400
ingo <ing### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

> There are two reasons why I sometimes wonder why there is no 
> "Gamma_correction yes/no" instead of assumed_gamma;
> 
> - assumed_gamma seems to generate a lot of confusion although the way
> it works is technically correct.

  Yes, but gamma in general generates a lot of confusion, isn't? ;)
 
> - Working with POV-Ray is like working in a photo studio (even for
> outdoor scenes) where you have full control over the lighting scheme
> and thus over  contrast range / distribution ('gamma'). 

  That's true, but I think you must have a way to adjust the image for
the viewing conditions (once the scene is finished), without having to
change all the lighting and texturing setup. Also, we need a standard
way to "syncronize" our viewing gammas when sharing code. The float
assumed_gamma give us this all, IMHO.

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres
		
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message