Timo invites you to examine his images and see for yourself. But "Proof by Example" is not the scientific method.
Timo gives, in a web page and in a Usenet article, an experiment that he claims determines the coding law. The experiment involves using Photoshop to compute a histogram. But the experiment is faulty. All it proves is that fewer than 256 codes are used, it concludes nothing about what intensity values are assigned to what code values.
Timo fails to cite primary sources. He fails to cite even merely authoritative sources. In several cases, he claims what you and I would consider fairly reliable sources to be misguided.
None of this would matter matter if he could prove his case scientifically. But he presents faulty experiments, and proof by example. And he is backed up by no one, let alone anyone having credibility or a reputation.
Timo claims that the Gamma FAQ is wrong and misleading. But I offer scientific evidence to allow you to prove to yourself how nonlinear coding works. I back up my assertions with primary references from the scientific literature. I do not have to resort to claims that the "major players in the imaging market have been mislead."
See also: Gamma FAQ - Linear and nonlinear coding - Timo and linear coding
Charles Poynton
Copyright © 1998-03-12