Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!radius!pierce
From: pierce@radius.com (Pierce T. Wetter III)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Gamma correction (was: Radiosity Image Correction)
Message-ID: <1467@radius.com>
Date: 29 May 91 23:32:39 GMT
References: <1991May27.135349.5072@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> <14070@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <18055@celit.fps.com>
Lines: 26

billd@fps.com (Bill Davidson) writes:

>In article <14070@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> srnelson@nelsun.Eng.Sun.COM (Scott R. Nelson) writes:
>>The broadcast television industry has settled on a standard gamma value of
>>2.222222 (1.0/0.45).  This has been build into television sets for
>>decades.  This value happens to look correct on all properly adjusted
>>monitors that I have seen.

>Huh?  It seems like every color monitor I come across has a different
>gamma value and some are extreme (I know of one that needs about 3.2).
>Other than that, I agree with your post.  Manufacturers of RGB monitors
>don't seem to be able to agree on anything.

  

  Actually, the one good thing to come out of the HDTV stuff is that they
 all managed to agree on one phosphor set: CCIR-Rec709, and they all pledged
 to use it. 

  Of course, different coatings change the perceived color...

Pierce
-- 
My postings are my opinions, and my opinions are my own not that of my employer.
You can get me at radius!pierce@apple.com.
(Wha'ja want? Some cute signature file? Hah! I have real work to do.