POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : More Gamma Again : Re: More Gamma Again Server Time
31 Jul 2024 04:17:18 EDT (-0400)
  Re: More Gamma Again  
From: Warp
Date: 2 Dec 2010 04:11:10
Message: <4cf762ae@news.povray.org>
On 12/02/2010 02:01 AM, Jaap Frank wrote:
> That's odd, because for me the 3.6 side is correct and the 3.7 side is
> far too bright.
> I've a rather new HD LCD TFT monitor (about 6 months) and adjusted it
> conform the windows 7 system with brightness and contrast followed by
> color shade correction.
> Further the monitor of my laptop (Acer Aspire, 1 year old, crystal clear
> display) shows exactly the same picture. Both are driven by the NVidia
> card inside the laptop, so they should be the same and for /me/ they
> are. The pictures are displayed by Windows Live Mail.

  Note that at least with some LCD displays (especially on some laptops)
the angle from which you look at the screen affects the brightness. For
example, if I look at the image I posted in a MacBook laptop, I can
"tune" the "gamma correction" of the display by tilting the screen back
or forth (thus changing the vertical angle from which I look at the
screen). At some angles it looks like the brightness of the sides
correspond to the center of the 3.6 gradient (and thus the 3.7 gradient
is too bright), while at other angles it looks like they correspond to
the center of the 3.7 gradient (and thus the 3.6 gradient looks too
dark). (And everything in-between, of course.) This tells me that the
screen on this laptop is an *extremely* poor tool to determine which one
is correct (if either), because I can change it by simply looking at it
from a higher or a lower angle.

  I do understand, however, that many of the more modern and expensive
LCD displays don't suffer from this problem (at least not as badly).

  If I had a working camera I could take photos to corroborate these
findings, but unfortunately I don't.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.