I work with macs and the whole color management process is a new arena for me. It was news to me when I learned that macs are calibrated to 1.8gamma, and an optimal web surfing experience would be more pc oriented at 2.2gamma.
Trying to nail a workflow down using Lightroom v1.4 and CS3. Lightroom defaults to the ProPhoto colorspace at 1.8gamma. Anything thrown up on the Web should be worked on in 2.2gamma. As I understand it, if I’m outputting to print I should be at 1.8gamma.
How does the L* curve fit into this? I understand it’s a hybrid between the two. I’ve heard people discuss it’s “rise in popular use.” But how the heck is it applied for practical use? Is it a compromise for people who don’t want to be bothered switching gamma curves?
I noticed at 2.2g my macbook pro laptop blows out highlight tones in photos pretty easily. My primary computer is a gorgeous 24" imac.
Also, how would I decide when the colors are nailed on the monitor between 100 and 120 cd/m2?
Thanks for the assistance!
Macs were generally calibrated with 1.8 gamma years ago. More recently with the web de facto standard being at 2.2 - it just makes for more consistency to use 2.2 for both platforms, at least that is the general recommendation these days - although there is still a bit of debate about this in the upper levels of color management gurus.
Keep in mind that if you are working in Photoshop the gamma number is irrelevant. Since Photoshop makes use of the profile it sort of cancels this out. Your choice of gamma would make a difference with other programs that do not make use of profiles. 2.2 will tend to have more contrast and have darker midtones than 1.8.
http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Gamma
L* is a gamma that is perceptually linear. I pick L* when the choice is available in the calibration software I’m using. It makes sense to have an even transition that matches perception, rather than trying to decide between more contrast and less contrast.
Did you re-calibrate your laptop after re-setting it to 2.2? You should not be seeing blown out highlights if your calibration software/hardware is working correctly.
Whew! Good questions.
[ "Keep in mind that if you are working in Photoshop the gamma number is irrelevant. Since Photoshop makes use of the profile it sort of cancels this out. Your choice of gamma would make a difference with other programs that do not make use of profiles. 2.2 will tend to have more contrast and have darker midtones than 1.8. "]
You led right into another question…
The monitor, should be set at the same gamma of the colorspace for the images you’re working on. Yes?
For example, in Lightroom in the default ProPhoto colorspace, the monitor would match at 1.8g…
If you stay in ProPhoto into Photoshop, then the monitor should be at 1.8g. Outputting to print, not for the web. Working with anything for the web, the monitor should be changed to 2.2g.
Why use *L? If it would not best accurately reflect colours for neither the web or print?
That I’ll leave open for discussion but the important bit is if I understand and am working correctly with this workflow I mentioned above. I’m changing monitor gamma values changing between print and Web output workspace.
Now I wonder which workspace DvX Optics Pro works in… hmm.
Photoshop makes use of your monitor profile whenever it is showing your image on the screen, so it compensates for whatever gamma you have in your monitor profile. So whatever gamma you profiled to is not really a factor in how your screen looks - when viewing in Photoshop or any other monitor profile-aware program.
Go ahead and try this yourself. Make a 1.8 gamma profile and a 2.2 gamma profile, set one of them as your monitor profile and compare a test image in Photoshop to some standard print you like to use. Do the same with the other profile. I doubt you would be able to tell the difference between the two profiles.
This business of gamma choice really only has a bearing on programs that are not profile-savvy.
