Gamma correction issues are always a pain. A review: given 256 grey levels, it makes sense to make them perceptually uniform. Thus a 20% grey intensity (one fifth the physical intensity of white) should be around 127 as it is perceptually half way between black and white. But what happens when you want to use it as a texture map in a physically based renderer? You need to "de-gamma" the image. If you are using somebody else's renderer, should you do that as a preprocess or might they do it? For my own purposes in that situation I have made three textures of the grey squares in the macbeth color checker chart. The grey square in position 3 from the left (i.e., the third darkest) should look mid-grey in your final render. The 1.0 image has 0.19*255 in that square so it is not gamma corrected (i.e. the byte values are linear in intensity). Of course to make this all more complicated, a renderer might or might not do something different if there is something in the texture's color profile or not.
6 comments:
I'm a bit confused here. I always thought gamma correction was all about compensation for the nonlinearity in the display, due to the nonlinearity of the electron gun in a CRT for example. Thus a compensation to make sure that 50% grey indeed was displayed as 50% grey.
The 18% reflectance is indeed what humans perceive as middle grey, but I don't see the relation with the gamma correction (18% ** 1/2.2 is not 50% btw, 22% ** 1/2.2 is).
I don't really regard gamma correction as part of the tone mapping process, but rather a device dependent compensation.
But of course, whatever the reason behind the gamma correction is, it doesn't change a thing about the need to de-gamma your textures when using them for rendering.
Anyway, as far as I understand the whole zone system thing, a surface with 18% reflectance should be tonemapped on middle gray, that is on 50% grey in print.
And for a CRT display, that means that that again should be gamma corrected to 72% to show as 50% linear intensity.
I find it all very confusing though, so I could be totally wrong about it =)
Gamma correction is indeed there for the non-linearity of the display, but why is that non-linearity there? Manufacturers could easily make a gamma 1 system and in fact Evans and Sutherland did just that in the mid-90s. In the darks it was awful due to the big distance between 0, 1, 2, etc. In addition, 250, 251, ..., 255 all looked the same. So I am reasonably sure that the reason for gamma is perceptual.
I am curious whether anybody knows the history of what gamma is used. There was a time when macs were 1.8 and PCs were 2.2 and images didn't have headers with that info so we all had to be acutely aware of the lack of standardization.
Gamma (as far as I know) came into being as part of the NTSC work. So you may be right that originally that was all to do with CRT compensation.
As to the 18%, remember that white is around 90% so that 18% should probably be 0.2 in your 0 to 1 scale. And interestingly, the macbeth color checker has 19% as the middle grey.
If you need to gamma correct a linear image that is encoded in 8 bit pixels, then you indeed get these horrible steps in the dark. Adding some noise first might help I think.
AFAIK, it is all due a inherent nonlinearity in the electron guns. It is of course possible to compensate for that in the electronic circuit, but somehow they never did. Except for the odd attempt apparently. Maybe they liked "the effect". Nobody was thinking about exact colour reproduction at that time.
Depending on the exact construction, they might have a different gamma value. So that's probably why apple 1.8 (or even 1.4), PC has 2.2, and SGI 1.7. Nowdays, with sRGB they seem to settle for 2.2 and actually now "compensate modern displays" to get the 2.2 gamma =)
Anyway, as long as it is standard, it's all right for me ;)
That 18% is more or less 50% once gamma corrected, is I think more of a coincidence. As they were thinking about middle greys and zone systems in the analog era. OTOH, maybe someone thought 2.2 to be a good gamma because it mapped 18% grey on +/- 50%.
Ah, I don't know. I'm just totally lost ;)
No, forget that last sentence. If 18% is gamma corrected to 50% to be shown on a display with a gamma of 2.2, it would still show as 18% grey, not the middle grey of zone V.
It really is confusing, isn't it? =)
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,A片,視訊聊天室,聊天室,視訊,視訊聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,上班族聊天室,成人聊天室,中部人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,視訊交友網a片,a片
免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛
A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,avdvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX,成人論壇
情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,免費AV,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色網
情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片
av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室,美女交友,成人光碟
情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,日本a片,a片下載,線上a片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室
Post a Comment