🚀 go-pugleaf

Hello

I really do not believe in gamma encoding images at all.
I believe that the linear data should be operated on to optimise the image. This is the approach that Adobe Raw seems to be taking.

There is no specific inverse gamma intent. The controls are like audio equalisation, their use takes into account the nonlinearities if the monitors and our eyes. We get the correct result using a variety of controls.

This how audio processing takes place. We use linear as possible microphones to acquire the sound. We monitor on linear as possible loudspeakers and we use the channel equalisation to optimse the sound to take account of the nonlinearities in our ears and the monitors/room.

In audio we do not apply a fixed at source pre-emphasis to all the audio to allow for the fact that our ears are not linear. Why do we do it for pictures? It is after all data processing. Why mess up the data with a arbitrary fixed pre emphasis like gamma encoding.

That is why I do not completely agree with Mr Autiokari.In his argument he still has to alpply the inverse gamma at the end of the process.

I do feel that the argues along the right lines.

All data processing should be done linearly, with the nonlinearities, being corrected in the process, not at the beginning or the end.

This is how I believe that Photoshop will evolve.

Time will tell.

Mike Engles