Uli Zappe

> @mm2 When this is going to be merged?? Never, I’m afraid, unless many people argue for it. Back in 2016, Marti Maria said he wouldn’t want to merge it...

> BTW, mpv just says BT.709 OETF should be interpreted as BT.1886. Yep, and that is exactly the core of the problem. From an ICC/colorimetric POV you cannot “interpret” PCS...

> > you combine > > That is not what happens and BT.1886 is 2.4 gamma Whatever. It’s not 1.96 (BT.709) which it would have to be for correct color...

> Anyway, how in your opinion dim surround compensation should happen? Because BT.1886 is on LCD display is almost gamma 2.2. But now on my OLED, BT.1886 is 2.4. The...

> What linear light should ICC be applied onto? Camera 1.96 or display 2.4? Camera 1.96. That’s the source data. Whether a color appearance correction in the display output is...

> I think it should be 'Camera 1.0' I believe the camera should be treated as linear, going into the first transform. At least, that's what I do for camera...

> I just didn't get good results until I started assigning linear camera profiles to raw data prior to that initial transform. Well, maybe the camera **_raw_** data _is_ linear...

> There is still a merge conflict, you reopening did not help. It wasn’t supposed to do that; I closed by accident and therefore immediately reopened. > normal ICC profiles...

> > showed that Apple uses 1.96, not the BT.709 curve > > That will mean that some black colors are not visable at all. They are, because Apple uses...

> > And both approaches work in that regard, it’s just that the results are not identical > > Again, are you sure they are different? Yes. They are clearly...