- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:39:08 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
Chris Murphy wrote: > > And then also that there has been no implementation of gamma correction, > and still there is no implementation of gamma (only) correction, Section > 3.1.1 which remains in the spec? Do you mean gamma correction in general, or a CSS specification for it? You can't do transparency or anti-aliasing properly without it (although I suspect that a lot of image replacements are not properly gamma corrected!). I would be interested to know how many authors actually understand gamma correction. It is very common on amateur and in house designed web sites to find images with gamma 1.0, yet the authors seem to be oblivious as to how dark they render). It is also not that uncommon to find ones with the Mac gamma, although they are more likely to come from a design agency. To some extent this is exacerbated because it seems that some digital cameras generated gamma 1.0 but label it as sRGB. (The problem being that image sensors generally approximate gamma 1.0 devices, so need gamma correcting for either sRGB use or to achieve equal perceptual brightness steps between digitisation levels. sRGB approximates CRT behaviour; the Mac approximates equal perceptual brightness). Images with bad gamma appear in PDF as well. -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Friday, 11 July 2008 06:38:02 UTC