> Sorry, but that's not true. I know the difference between Bayer > interpolation and gamma-encoding. And gamma-encoding is not "simply > applying a logrithmic function" to the data before quantizing. It's a > mite bit more involved than that, although it presents a first order > approximation. > > Now that you explain what you meant more clearly, I understand > exactly what you're saying. But it is meaningless when it comes to > RAW workflow for someone using tools like Photoshop, and nearly all > other production RAW conversion tools, on Mac OS X or Windows. The > theoretical advantages of dividing Bayer interpolation from gamma- > encoding, keeping the data in a linear representation, etc, is of no > real significance when it comes to producing pictorial photographs > when you have tools that do it well combined with good color > management and [EMAIL PROTECTED] quantization space. > If you haven't already, you might want to take a read of this guy's rantings on linear vs. gamma errors. The color management part of it is different from "gamma errors." http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/evaluation/gie/index.htm
I'm pretty sure that even with Winders/MacOSX, one can establish a workflow to edit in linear colorspace. Pedantry aside, "real significance" is not the same as significance. The latter is objective and quantifiable. The former requires an individual's interpretation.... a *very* movable target depending on the individual. I don't trust myself to make those calls, so I rely on what's objective. -Cory -- ************************************************************************* * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA * * Electrical Engineering * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * ************************************************************************* -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net