Originally Posted by tiddler
Bud, given your own experiences then, would you have a look back at the Gray Selection Procedure
posting and see if it makes sense to you. The selection procedure discussion started back at post 211.
I am also interested in your thoughts on the screen shots I presented last night.
I would say your methodology in making all the required shade samples from a gallon of white is a really good approach and the best method I have seen for coming up with the most information with the least amount of expense. That part I don't have any problem at all with.
I think in the case of what we use as a gold standard to compare against is what is needed. In an ideal world we would all have a 1.0 calibrated sample but no one does. I did a lot of my comparison using the shiny side of a sheet of BOC I keep around and sometimes I have used white copy paper. In the examples you showed us today we have your screen as a comparison not anything white around 1.0 gain. I think the reason you saw less than stellar performance was because both test samples were far outside your projectors range to tolerate gray. That is really apparent with how much better things look on your screen behind.
Kind of the classic example of people trying silver screen based on someone's good experiences only to be mortified by the grungy colors of skin tones and whites. I have tried for a year to interpret what our Cajun pal tells us and I believe this is what he refers to often as crushing not enough lumens to show the complete spectrum of the image so what does come back to your eyes is fragment. Not so different than pulling one of your RGB cables off your projector and getting only 2/3 of the information, only in this case its being clipped based on brightness.
Both of the samples in the test were showing Blacks and were too dark for your eyes or your cam to capture perceived contrast. Or improvement in perceived contrast.
The reason we can take a picture of something that is perceived by our brain is that the cam works much as our eyes and brain do. When given an image of white and black the eye and the cam adjust to derive information from the white area and settle on a averaging of the two. Our brain sees the image and the cam exposes the film so to speak. Given a lot of white and a little black we see the black very dark aperture closed . Given a lot of black and a little white we see the white bright aperture open. Given all the image data down on the dark end in shades of black and gray and then some introduced ambient light we loose any ability of perceived contrast and only see actual contrast with wide open aperture. crushing
By making your samples both out of the range of your projectors sweet spot in terms of lumens the changes the poly added weren't going to be in the range of seeing or taking a picture of.
Like Dennis Miller says That's just my opinion and I could be wrong.