@Dogway I was reading the Poynton paper “The rehabilitation of gamma” here https://poynton.ca/PDFs/Rehabilitation_of_gamma.pdf .
It’s in interesting read (18 pages of high level stuff on gamma alone) even though most of it is above my level. I was especially interested by two remarks about misconception vs fact, see page 2 of the paper and quoted below
Misconception: A CRT is characterized by a power function that relates luminance L to voltage V’: L=(V’)γ.
Fact: A CRT is characterized by a power function, but including a black-level offset term: L=(V’ +ε)γ. Usually, γ has a value quite close to 2.5; if you’re limited to a single-parameter model, L=(V’ +ε)2.5 is much better than L=(V’)γ.
Misconception: The exponent γ varies anywhere from about 1.4 to 3.5.
Fact: The exponent itself varies over a rather narrow range, about 2.35 to 2.55. The alleged wide variation comes from variation in offset term of the equation, not the exponent: Wide variation is due to failure to correctly set the black level.
So I was wondering about two things:
- whether Grade already accounts for the “black-level offset term” in the gamma equation as above, or whether it would be useful to do so?
- A CRT when properly adjusted has a black level of about 0.01 cd/m2, whereas a properly adjusted IPS LED panel has a black level of about 0.30 cd/m2 (or worse): 30 times as high. Could this higher black level of the IPS panel be accounted for in grade’s gamma function by using above black-level offset term?
Hopefully you can shed some light on this