wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: Java on PC/MAC (was Re: Origins of the Panorama view)
Francis Fougere 2005-Jan-20 01:19:00
Hi Yuv
You can try to calibrate your monitor by eye using Adobe Gamma which comes
with PhotoShop, if your eye is good. Every one else will need a calibration
device such as Eye One and the software to go with it. The software is more
important actually as most of the calibration devices are somewhat similar.
You would want software which will calibrate your white point as well as
your black point. Eye-one is a good choice.
Francis
----- Original Message -----
From: "yuval levy" <#removed#>
To: <#removed#>
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: Java on PC/MAC (was Re: Origins of the Panorama view)
>
> Hi Francis,
>
> I am no expert but I understand the logic and the
> explanation. Thank you for sharing this with us.
>
> The discussion thread mention measuring/calibrating a
> display's gamma. Any help on how is that done?
>
> thanks
> Yuv
>
> --- Francis Fougere <#removed#> wrote:
>
> >
> > > An issue that concerns me is the discrepancy
> > between the default
> > > gamma of Mac (1.8) and PC (2.2) monitors that
> > causes images on the PC
> > > to appear darker than on the Mac. Any suggestions,
> > anyone?
> > > --
> > >
> > > Uri Cogan
> >
> > Hi Uri
> > Your gamma issues as described above have been
> > discussed elsewhere on a
> > different list server to which I belong to. I have
> > copied the discussion
> > below as I could not have explained it any better
> > myself. I have been
> > involved in getting photography to the ink on paper
> > process for twenty years
> > and I have found Andrew Rodney's advise to be spot
> > on.
> > Francis Fougere
> >
> >
> > The following was copied from an other list server.
> > For information about
> > joining these lists or contact info please contact
> > me at #removed#
> >
> >
> >
> > yo dudesz...
> >
> > i just had a very enlightening discussion for the
> > good people at
> > gretagmacbeth,
> > where i was encouraged to change the Gamma of my
> > Apple Monitor from 1.8 to
> > 2.2...
> >
> > it was explained to me that the Gamma of 1.8 for
> > your Apple monitor was
> > first determined for an old Apple Laser Printer that
> > no longer exists
> > today...
> > setting your monitor to a Gamma of 2.2 may more
> > accurately represent the
> > deep rich blacks that can be with todays modern
> > desktop printers...
> > talk to you soon...
> > --
> > Mark
> > www.prorental.com
> >
> > Correct. The 1.8 gamma legacy is kind of dumb
> > (especially in light of OSX
> > when Apple could have just gone to 2.2). It does
> > date back to gamma response
> > of the old LaserWriter on a 1 bit display.
> >
> > Displays don't really have a gamma per say (they
> > have a tone response curve
> > which provide a measurement in gamma). Most LCDs and
> > CRTs have a native TRC
> > gamma of about 2.2. Certainly closer than 1.8!
> >
> > The farther you get to the native behavior of the
> > display system, the more
> > compensation has to take place at the video card LUT
> > (Look Up Table). So
> > with an 8-bit LUT (in nearly all cases), you're
> > doing a lot more correction
> > when you calibrate (force the display) into 1.8 than
> > 2.2. The results are
> > more banding and other issues.
> >
> > Mac users should do one of two things. First,
> > calibrate to 2.2 not 1.8.
> > Better yet is to measure the NATIVE gamma of the
> > display and calibrate to
> > that. It might be 2.1 or 2.2 or 2.3 or a fraction of
> > that. 2.2 is close
> > enough although with the Sony Artisan you can
> > actually tell the software to
> > aim for the specific and unique gamma of that
> > display.
> >
> > Downside to this for Mac users is the OS "assumes"
> > 1.8 so anything you view
> > that's not ICC aware will look a bit dark. It's not
> > a big deal. Photoshop
> > will gladly handle the disconnect in gamma from the
> > OS since it's using the
> > display profile which "knows" how the unit was set.
> >
> > > setting your monitor to a Gamma of 2.2 may more
> > accurately represent the
> > > deep rich blacks that can be with todays modern
> > desktop printers...
> >
> > The gamma here however doesn't play a role with the
> > printer or output
> > device. That's all handled by the output profile.
> >
> > Ah, the gamma of the working space and the display
> > have no relation and
> > don't have to match. The gamma of a working space is
> > simply that, the input
> > to output values of that color space. There's no
> > reason why you can't aim
> > for a gamma of 2.2 for the display and use a 1.8
> > gamma in a working space
> > like that found in ColorMatch RGB or ProPhoto RGB. A
> > 2.2 gamma in a working
> > space is more perceptually uniform but that's not
> > anything to really lie
> > awake at night worrying about.
> >
> > Andrew Rodney
> > http://digitaldog.net/
> >
> >
> >
> > ------
> > The World-Wide Panorama
> >
> > For more information:
> > -Visit the web site at
> > http://GeoImages.Berkeley.edu/wwp.html
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> > #removed#
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
> ------
> The World-Wide Panorama
>
> For more information:
> -Visit the web site at http://GeoImages.Berkeley.edu/wwp.html
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>