re: the tone-vs-geometry positive control rested on a number that cannot carry it
sylpheed-port found that my control's premise misreads their figure. The 0.06 % counts pixels surviving -threshold 25%, differing by more than ~64 levels -- a gross-displacement detector, blind to sub-pixel offsets and antialiasing, which are exactly what a per-level LUT also cannot close. It says no gross displacement, not geometry is right, and I read one as the other. Their direct measurement, attributed and not reproduced here: after the LUT the menu's residual is 6.94 on edge pixels against 2.20 on flat, with a known negative leaving 0.00. So the menu carries spatial error and is not a geometry-free control. The 32/68 result does not rest on it -- 'whatever a fitted per-level LUT cannot close is not a per-level effect' is the method's own basis and is self-standing. What the control shows is narrower than claimed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
This commit is contained in:
@@ -36,8 +36,29 @@ So fitting a LUT *on the screen itself* and measuring what remains gives an
|
|||||||
## The positive control
|
## The positive control
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The method must be able to close a residual that really is tone. On the **main
|
The method must be able to close a residual that really is tone. On the **main
|
||||||
menu** — where the port measures only 0.06 % of pixels differing, so geometry is
|
menu** it does:
|
||||||
essentially right — it does:
|
|
||||||
|
> 🔴 **THE PREMISE OF THIS CONTROL WAS WRONG, corrected 2026-08-31.** It read
|
||||||
|
> *"where the port measures only 0.06 % of pixels differing, so geometry is
|
||||||
|
> essentially right"*. That 0.06 % is `verify-capture`'s, and it counts pixels
|
||||||
|
> surviving `-threshold 25%` — differing by more than ~64 levels. **It is a
|
||||||
|
> gross-displacement detector by design**, blind to sub-pixel offsets and
|
||||||
|
> antialiasing, which are exactly what a per-level LUT also cannot close. It says
|
||||||
|
> *no gross displacement*, not *geometry is right*, and I read one as the other.
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> `sylpheed-port` measured the screen directly (`DECISIONS.md` at `5738b83`): after
|
||||||
|
> this LUT, the menu's residual is **6.94 on edge pixels against 2.20 on flat —
|
||||||
|
> 3.2×**, with a known negative (a render against itself under a pure gamma)
|
||||||
|
> leaving exactly **0.00**, since a per-level LUT inverts a per-level effect
|
||||||
|
> perfectly. **So the menu carries spatial error and is not a geometry-free
|
||||||
|
> control.** ⚠️ I have **not** reproduced that split — it needs their render beside
|
||||||
|
> the capture — and it is recorded as their measurement, not mine.
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> ✅ **The result below does not rest on this control.** *"Whatever a fitted
|
||||||
|
> per-level LUT cannot close is, by construction, not a per-pixel-level effect"* is
|
||||||
|
> stated as the method's basis above and stands on its own. What the control
|
||||||
|
> actually shows is narrower than claimed: the LUT closes 70 % of the menu's
|
||||||
|
> residual — evidence it works on tone, not evidence the menu is tone-only.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
| | mean abs difference | closed |
|
| | mean abs difference | closed |
|
||||||
|---|---|---|
|
|---|---|---|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user