Ah! As they should be. Apple uses the 1.8 standard because that was the
best the original MacIntosh could do, I understand.
I do not know what Tom is using but if it is not a Mac his gamma setting
is off quite a bit. Even if it is a Mac, he ought to set the gamma at
2.2 for web images.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if you were addressing me or Tom, but my Apple monitors are all
running at 2.2.
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Interesting, as I know you use an Apple. Because when I turn my monitor
up to 1.8 gamma the photo shows that separation. At 2.2 it does look
under exposed.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pretty dog. Nice shot. On my work monitor, which is only roughly calibrated,
it seems to lack shadow detail in that the eyes don't separate out from the hair
very well. A little tweak of black level might be called for, but I can't say
for sure with this monitor. In any case, a good grab.
Paul
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I went for a walk with our Border Collie last weekend. It's rare she goes
on a walk with just me and without our other dog (the alpha). Anyway...
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4279519
