>Hmmmm . . . I thought that was what the whole assumed_gamma,
>display_gamma thing was about . . . that if you constructed your
>.pov file using assumed_gamma 1.0 . . . then it would render with
>the same brightness on anyone's machine as long as they also used
>assumed = 1.0 and had their display_gamma set for their machine.
>Or . . . am I still missing something . . . ???


That's how I read it too - but only if you rerender the scene on your
system. Since Gamma-Information is not stored in the imagefile, there is no
way for the displaying system to know "how it was meant".

But I think all this "too dark"-shouts were meant more in another direction:
the image did not look like sunshine. I didn't notice that before I made the
newer version with 50% a stronger light_source. Have a look at the new file
... oh I see you did that already.

Kari Kivisalo advised me once to set assumed_gamma always to 1.0 and set the
display_gamma to the correct value. He said, those who know what to do can
adjust there viewer accordingly (I should have mentioned that I'm using
assumed_gamma 1.0, though). As I know nobody who seems to understand more of
this topic, I'll stick to his advice.

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message