[argyllcms] Re: I don't understand the -u option

On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:38 +0100, Lars Tore Gustavsen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Leonard Evens
> <len@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > The reason for my concern is the following.  I use gimp to modify my
> > digital images and regularly save the results on CDs and DVDs.  I would
> > like what I scan to look approximately the same when and if I, or
> > someone else, possibly using a different monitor and
> > calibration/profile, at some time in the future.  Every time I make
> > changes in a digital file, I lose some information, so I would like what
> > I ave to represent some `final product' or something as close to that
> > which I can manage.  I can always go back and rescan film, if necessary,
> > but I can't recreate my original digital camera images.   Perhaps I
> > should always save the original files, but that would require quite a
> > lot of duplication, so I don't want to do that if it is not necessary.
> 
> If you have configured gimp to pick up your monitor profile the gamma
> does not matter. So a mac user with a gamma of 1.8 and you with 2.8
> will experience the same visual image, if both of you have
> colormanaged applications. For non color managed application the
> difference will be huge.


What I am worried about is whether or not I see the same thing if next
year I get another monitor and after calibrating/profiling it I end up
with a different gamma.  I don't care about the mythical Mac user.  I
may be misunderstanding something, but when I try different
calibration/profiles with different gammas,  I don't think I end up
seeing the same thing in gimp or eye-of-gnome, both color managed
applications.
> 
> Don't believe all this gamma tests, I think that topic have been
> discussed here before.
> 
> Regards
> Lars Tore Gustavsen
>

Other related posts: