Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/03/21

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

Subject: [Leica] What gamma are y'all using for Mac monitors these days?
From: hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson)
Date: Wed Mar 21 19:06:51 2007
References: <20070321221803.GK16795@jbm.org>

Jeff, every colour management reference that I have encountered says use 2.2 
for both PCs and Macs.
If screen display is your priority, there are many more Windows systems out 
there than Macs. How many of those would actually be
calibrated is a different story. If prints are your priority, and  you are 
using the system to photo edit, then accurate soft
proofing is affected by your setup. 
One vote here for 2.2 anyway.

Cheers
Hoppy (PC system)

-----Original Message-----
FSubject: [Leica] What gamma are y'all using for Mac monitors these days?

After a few years using a couple of generations of the kind-of-okay
Spyder color-calibration gizmos, Kathryn and I have bitten the financial
bullet and scored ourselves a fancy X-Rite (nee Gretag-Macbeth) Eye-One
Pro, hoping to calibrate monitors *and* printers properly.

While doing the monitor recalibration, I looked up a few references and
saw some folk recommending running the display at that nasty dark 2.2
gamma Windows PCs are so fond of using, instead of the Mac-traditional
1.8.  Is this some sort of trend, or did I just run across a few bum
leads?  If one's using proper color-managed applications and tagged
images, should it even make a difference?  The display's target gamma is
encoded somewhere in the profile such that it can be compensated for,
right?

Confused in Jersey City.




In reply to: Message from jbm at jbm.org (Jeff Moore) ([Leica] What gamma are y'all using for Mac monitors these days?)