Patrick White wrote: >"Dan Scott" wrote: >>(sometimes shifting her monitor to my Mac), but it isn't the same. Text >>and graphics on her 17" are crisp and clear, but some photos in various
>>web galleries are now very "blah"-- but were quite nice viewed on my old >>monitor. <snip> >One of these days, some bright person will get around to designing a >popular image encoding format that stores the image data and the gamma that >that data was encoded with. Then machines that know they use a different >gamma can adjust the pixel values to give a close approximation of what the >original image was supposed to look like. I believe the PNG graphics format does that. I'm not sure because I don't use that format (pretty much no one does) and, like GIF, it's supposedly not very well suited to photographic images. As far as the monitor quality issue raised by the original poster, you might also want to check that the PC in question is set for 24-bit or 32-bit "true color" rather than 16-bit "high color". The difference isn't obvious with a lot of images, but is *very* apparent with others. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
