On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Bartek Skorupa (priv) <bartekskor...@bartekskorupa.com> wrote: > Conversion to sRBG inside the algorithm can be treated as one of the > operations this node performs. > If we don't call this "conversion to sRGB", but "primary adjustment" or > whatever else - we don't anymore perceive it as a bug, don't you think?
I'd be confident calling this a bug largely because any assumptions of color space, including transfer curve as in this instance, will often lead to unintended consequences. Again too, the notion that a conversion to sRGB transfer curve happens likely means the node is fundamentally problematic in a scene referred paradigm. > If it's left this way we would only have to change names of the operations. > "Gain" should be called "Slope" and "Lift" should be called "offset". > Then everybody who knows those terms simply don't get unexpected results. Sure, the label might be improved, but "Offset + Slope" isn't likely handy. There _is_ a correct gain as well as reference ASC CDL transforms provided via OCIO, and perhaps we can more further integrate the API into adjustments such as this example? With respect, TJS _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
