 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Oddly enough, I've found myself, a tyro, in the position of requiring a color
matching function (or at least finding it useful). In particular, I'm trying to
do what macro Emissive2xyz() does, but without the normalization.
CIE.inc has the spline CMF_xyz(), but it isn't documented anywhere, and except
for one test scene, is called only internally. Is CMF_xyz() a stable feature,
i.e., is it safe for the user to assume that it will be there indefinitely?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 13.12.2013 02:35, schrieb Cousin Ricky:
> Oddly enough, I've found myself, a tyro, in the position of requiring a color
> matching function (or at least finding it useful). In particular, I'm trying to
> do what macro Emissive2xyz() does, but without the normalization.
>
At the time CIE.inc was written, the main goal was seamless integration
with lightsys, this is the only reason normalization is there (and thus
throwing away the intensity information on purpose).
> CIE.inc has the spline CMF_xyz(), but it isn't documented anywhere, and except
> for one test scene, is called only internally. Is CMF_xyz() a stable feature,
> i.e., is it safe for the user to assume that it will be there indefinitely?
>
Yes.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ive <ive### [at] lilysoft org> wrote:
> At the time CIE.inc was written, the main goal was seamless integration
> with lightsys, this is the only reason normalization is there (and thus
> throwing away the intensity information on purpose).
After reviewing Jaime's Web site, I had just come to that conclusion myself.
> Am 13.12.2013 02:35, schrieb Cousin Ricky:
> > CIE.inc has the spline CMF_xyz(), but it isn't documented anywhere, and except
> > for one test scene, is called only internally. Is CMF_xyz() a stable feature,
> > i.e., is it safe for the user to assume that it will be there indefinitely?
> >
> Yes.
Thanks!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
