clipka wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>> Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>> I'm a strong believer that the combination of graphic cards and display
>>> should provide a gamma of 1.0: linear curve;
That would probably not look good with just 8-bit per color. But I do
agree that would be the best. I don't think it would happen because in
the transition from today's default of 2.2 everything would look ugly.
>> I thought that too, and tried configuring my graphics card that way.
>> Everything looked washed out. Because almost nobody who makes images or
>> chooses website colors or whatever has the gamma set that way.
>
> Yep. Which is because nobody who *views* websites has the gamma set that way.
>
Most people view with something close to 2.2 I guess.
> Simple as that. There's a de-facto standard out there in real life. It's rather
> vague, but it's definitely *not* 1.0.
The de-facto standard on the web seems to be sRGB with a gamma close to
2.2 (The true gamma is more complicated, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRGB).
Thats what my monitors are tuned to anyway.
--
Daniel Nilsson
Post a reply to this message
|
