Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Project Jerusalem, or the f/1.4 school of landscape
From: "Jean-Claude Berger" <jcberger@jcberger.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 07:17:07 +0200

Hello Johny,

It seems there is a misunderstanding on the gamma concept. It represents a
correction that one gives to the video display set. The fact that it might be
different for Mac's and Pc's is irrelevant, IMHO. The idea is that you apply a
given gamma to get the *same* display of a given picture though you video system
reacts differently from your neighbor's one. IMHO again, low key or not low key,
your pictures should present a sufficient range of brigthness values. This is
independent from gamma. After that, viewer should apply a gamma correction that
suit any image he can see, not specially yours.

On a stricly practical point, I find, like Chandos, that you pictures are too
dark, a problem I don't have with other sites.

All the best,

- --
Jean-Claude Berger (jcberger@jcberger.com)
Systems and RDBMS consultant (MCSE)
Lyon, France
http://www.jcberger.com

> on 4/6/00 10:48 pm, Chandos Michael Brown at cmbrow@mail.wm.edu wrote:
>
> > Frankly, I find these impossibly dark--which may be a question of gamma,
> > but, then, why should a viewer have to fiddle with his/her monitor to look
> > at your images?
>
> Well, you tell me how you keep viewers on mac, windows 98, windows 2000,
> with or without colorsync, happy? Gammas varying between 1.8 and 2.2... with
> low-key images there is simply no way to keep everyone happy. Many of the
> images are delibarately very low key but not meant to be 'impossibly' so...
> check your platform-dependent solipsism at the door and crank up the
> brightness, if you're that concerned.
>
> --
> Johnny Deadman