1.8 vs 2.2 gamma

Discussion in 'macOS' started by okrelayer, Aug 29, 2009.

  1. okrelayer macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    #1
    Snow Leopard going to 2.2 gamma on the monitor is driving me nuts. While i am not a photographer, i feel that the 2.2 is hurting my eyes. Things feel harsher.. I went into the display options and defaulted back. What is your guys thoughts on it? Maybe i should give 2.2 a shot, it could be because i am used to the 1.8 gamma.
     
  2. wankey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    #2
    The new gamma absolutely rocks. Much more natural blacks, natural colors, overall just absolutely delicious for my eyes. No more white filter all over the colors, more true. Especially when I'm dealing with graphic designs.
     
  3. benlee macrumors 65816

    benlee

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    #3
    I had to do a recalibration with my external monitor. When comparing my old profiles, the 2.2 Gamma looks so much better. Everything looks more crisp.
     
  4. avalys macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    #4
    You know, it has always been possible to use 2.2 gamma in previous versions of OS X - it just wasn't the default. Similarly, you can set 10.6 back to 1.8...
     
  5. TheSpaz macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #5
    Yeah, I've been enjoying 2.2 gamma for a years now. The default never appealed to me. I *always* calibrate my monitor as soon as I get it. Why everyone thinks this is new, I have no idea.

    Calibrate your display if you want everything to look the way it was intended to look!
     
  6. Cinder6 macrumors 6502

    Cinder6

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    #6
    I, too, always set my gamma to 2.2 before SL.

    Any tips for the best calibration for a 13" unibody MB?
     
  7. otis123 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    #7
    i just toggled the settings and 2.2 looks much better, deeper blacks, and everything just pops.
     
  8. go.mouse macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #8
    2.2 looks nicer on my friend's 13" MBP (glossy screen), but horrible on my 17" MBP (matte screen) and 30" Cinema Display. I gotta go back to 1.8 for both of my displays.
     
  9. snickelfritz macrumors 65816

    snickelfritz

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Location:
    Tucson AZ
    #9
    The brightness setting in the Display Preferences was set to maximum by the 10.6 installer, which made the display initially seem more vibrant and bright.
    (my display profile was created with the brightness near minimum)

    The whites were totally blown out and lacking in detail.
    I first noticed it in the "jelly" iTunes visualizer.
    Setting the control back to the same setting used in the calibration, restored the color range and detail in the whites.
     
  10. okrelayer thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    #10
    you could tell the UI was made for the 1.8 gamma. Hopefully some of this gets sorted with 10.6.1 Just open equalizer in iTunes, the colors of the grays are way off. I am on 2.2 gamma btw. Trying to get used to it

    [​IMG]
     
  11. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #11
    I've been using 2.2 Gamma since I bought my first MacBook Pro in 2006.

    I always found 1.8 washed out.
     
  12. Yaboze macrumors 6502a

    Yaboze

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Location:
    The Garden State
    #12
    I noticed it right away. After the upgrade was done and the desktop came back up, I was like wow! The colors and everything looked really good, so I am keeping 2.2.
     

Share This Page