Given that we all know that ABL impacts the calibration of any plasma, what, if any, is the correct process to measure gamma on a plasma display.
For example, Panasonic have a specific gamma setting, 2.0, 2.2, etc etc, however when this is measured using the suggested window types (approx 10% plus) the gamma comes out different and any attempts to align it to 2.2 or whatever your target is, introduces some not so welcome effects.
So the first question is, given the importance of a correct gamma and its impact on other aspects of a calibration, saturation for example, what is the best way to achieve the required gamma number accross the entire lumincance range?
My second question is that if a manufacturer states a numerical gamma setting can this be relied upon as accurate?
My last question is whether to calibrate with normal ABL impact or the least possible ABL impact?
As discussed in a prevsious thread, I have found that using various patterns gives different readings across the board dependant on the window sizes being used, and this is confusing and frustrating for people trying to learn the process as it produces very much inconsistent results not only in data, but also visually.
I therefore recently decided to make some 1% patterns for my VT30. They gave me a virtually a flat line gamma in accordance with the displays gamma setting (the only pattern to do so), and using this I calibrated all aspects of the display and the result was far better than I wished for and gave me an accurate contrast ratio which larger patterns have not. I know many people would disagree with this approach in terms of the pattern size as it doesn not reflect 'real world' content. Fair enough, but 10% windows also do not reflect real world content either and the results from using that size were worse on my Panasonic than my previous Samsung which could be calibrated with large windows no problem at all. Of course ABL has an impact, this I understand which I why i ask these questions in the first place.
Thanks!
For example, Panasonic have a specific gamma setting, 2.0, 2.2, etc etc, however when this is measured using the suggested window types (approx 10% plus) the gamma comes out different and any attempts to align it to 2.2 or whatever your target is, introduces some not so welcome effects.
So the first question is, given the importance of a correct gamma and its impact on other aspects of a calibration, saturation for example, what is the best way to achieve the required gamma number accross the entire lumincance range?
My second question is that if a manufacturer states a numerical gamma setting can this be relied upon as accurate?
My last question is whether to calibrate with normal ABL impact or the least possible ABL impact?
As discussed in a prevsious thread, I have found that using various patterns gives different readings across the board dependant on the window sizes being used, and this is confusing and frustrating for people trying to learn the process as it produces very much inconsistent results not only in data, but also visually.
I therefore recently decided to make some 1% patterns for my VT30. They gave me a virtually a flat line gamma in accordance with the displays gamma setting (the only pattern to do so), and using this I calibrated all aspects of the display and the result was far better than I wished for and gave me an accurate contrast ratio which larger patterns have not. I know many people would disagree with this approach in terms of the pattern size as it doesn not reflect 'real world' content. Fair enough, but 10% windows also do not reflect real world content either and the results from using that size were worse on my Panasonic than my previous Samsung which could be calibrated with large windows no problem at all. Of course ABL has an impact, this I understand which I why i ask these questions in the first place.
Thanks!
