Originally Posted by PE06MCG
Obviously things may have changed since Chris's post on CC but you did say that you agree with Chris in your post?
Perhaps I have misread this part of his post?
I would call it a matter of degree. Yes, there are "mastering houses" setting things up poorly. However, the biggest houses like Deluxe and Technicolor and Warner have always used BVMs, and are now moving to flat panels calibrated to look like BVMs. I know this for sure. I know some of the people who do those calibrations. They have always mastered to 2.4.
Now, Chris's concern is that not all content is done at the big houses, and there are random small producers who are all over the map. And he would like everyone to be using the same standard, as would I. There is confusion out there about gamma because:
- Until recently there was no standard (other than the de-facto standard of "match a BVM") for video display gamma. It wasn't thought to be necessary, because CRTs have a natural gamma, so they all tended to look very similar.
- There has been for years a standard for computer displays (sRGB) that specifies an effective 2.2 gamma
- The encoding gamma for video cameras has been specified as approximately 1/2, and the inverse of 1/2 is 2.
- Digital Cinema uses a 2.6 gamma
You put all this together and there's confusion. The computer gamma has, I think, been the biggest issue. People doing home production are typically using computer monitors, which are usually going to default to 2.2. This means that unless they go out of their way to recalibrate, when their content is viewed on a television, it looks darker. There are some number of people who came out of the computer world who think the best answer is to get everyone to adopt the computer standard, not understanding that video has had a de facto standard for its entire history. Hopefully BT.1886 will help clear this up.
Also, keep in mind that that thread was in 2011, when BT.1886 wasn't yet finalized and confusion was perhaps higher. I like to hope that very few of the people on that thread would still be saying that video should be mastered at 2.2 in the US. I really don't even know where they got that idea, other than the whole computer thing.
Anyway, I return to my first assertion, which has not changed: big-studio movies are now and have always been mastered to 2.4. Television production at the major networks is mastered to 2.4. There are miscellaneous small producers who do all kinds of wacky things, but you can't adapt your system to deal with their foolishness, so you shouldn't even try.