🚀 go-pugleaf

Hello

The story always was that visual perception needed a inverse gamma, and that inverse gamma was done to adapt the eye, rather than correct the CRT. The reasoning was that even if we had a linear display we would still inverse gamma.

Yet the only difference in my examples is the use of a CRT to view the image. That suggests that in all other circumstances we do not need inverse gamma.

If my slide were a hand painted victorian slide, with nothing to do with photography, I would in the first three examples be able to view it correctly, but not on a CRT unless inverse gamma was applied EITHER to the linear scan OR the CRT .

My contention is that one should not need inverse gamma when viewing images on a linear display.

The eye might use a power function to do its work, but all it needs is to perceive linearity as in real life. If it perceives linearity in a system that uses a linear scanner and a linear display, that condition is met.

With a CRT it does not perceive linearity, so a inverse non linear power function must be applied EITHER to the image OR to the CRT to meet the condition.

We apply inverse gamma to linearise the CRT. No other reason.

Cherio, this is my last word on the subject

Mike Engles