[Sethro]

I have been using Mac OS X for a while now and just learned that I could calibrate my screen with different color profiles. My question being what color profile is the best, should I stick with the normal calibration of 1.8 or move to 2.2 ( My Windows using roomate informed me that Windows uses 2.2 Gamma)

A. 1.8 Standard Gamma : Traditional Setting
B. 2.2 Televison Gamma: Working with images

I noticed with the 2.2 Gamma colours were darker and the first time I realized that the menu bar drop down feilds were actually semi-transparent!

Which one is more practical?
Which one do you use?

[jtrwallace]

if you go into advanced editing mode you can actually choose from a range of different gammas. i use 2.0 Gamma and, for me, its perfect.

[CatOne]

If you're going to do any photo work and publish it to the web you should use a 2.2 gamma.

In fact, I'd recommend you always use a 2.2 gamma. It's really the standard these days, except for a few cases of print publishing. 1.8 gamma is really an anachronism.

[Sethro]

Thanks for the input, as I log in the changes take effect and its really made a huge difference.

[isleofjib]

i agree. changing my display settings to 2.2 made a huge difference. much less wash-out than before.

[Sethro]

Darker colours look alot more richer in the 2.2 Televison Gamma.

But I noticed when watching a DVD, the original 1.8 Mac Gamma looks alot better, anyone else have the same results?

[Sourbook]

The Gamma Question: 1.8 or 2.2 ? - Photo Tips @ Earthbound Light

[phobos]

I'm using something in between. 1.8 is too bright and 2.2 is too dark sometimes. So I use a 2.0 value.