Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
In a way, I regret linking a discussion on the gamma debate as it seems to have distracted the purpose of this thread. But, in using the AVCHD calibration ISO (found at the beginning of this thread) to me at least, is what makes AVS forums so good. But, using this disc has also opened Pandora's Box. I found my projector has 8 different Gammas. And after seeing that (combined to that much discussed gamma link) prompted my curious mind to ask about gamma.
My background, over 30 years in product validation in the auto industry, began with working hands-on to design engineering. I learned to ask lots of questions to understand a common interest to those who know the answers. That's why I asked should gamma be set at 2.2 or 2.4 in post #894 & said, "That's what I don't get. Is this subjective to the viewer or is there a right or wrong?"
Leaving it to resolve myself, without the experience of many of you, I would look at it like this:
1) The goal of calibration is to replicate on screen as close as possible what is intended by the viewing source; BD, DVD, cable, DSB - whatever. It would seem there would be a known standard set by the source. If the source is encoded to a particular standard, then that's the calibration goal. What goes in is what comes out.
2) Anything different than that would be to the particular taste, or subjectiveness, of the viewer. The same could be said for audio. For example; I love hearing the T-Rex in Jurassic Park thunder across my theater! To some it's exaggerated; to me it's heaven!
I have my projector calibrated to 2 different user gammas. Switching back & forth to view differences I found gamma 2.4 adds a bit more punch to blacks & color. Gamma 2.2 seems to have more detail than 2.4. Colors & blacks lack the punch of 2.4 but has a smoother look. I have left it on gamma 2.2.
It would seem flexibility would be the key to adapt to newer display technologies.