Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove the 1..100 contrast limitation to avoid flicker #15

Open
dumblob opened this issue Mar 15, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Remove the 1..100 contrast limitation to avoid flicker #15

dumblob opened this issue Mar 15, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@dumblob
Copy link

dumblob commented Mar 15, 2023

I am a long time user of xcalib and for years I have been using the hack to first run xcalib -c and then xcalib -a -v | ... and then xcalib -a -co ... to simulate behavior of "percent points independent of the current state" instead of the current "percentage relative to the current state".

Now though I became too old to withstand the flickering due to xcalib -c.

Either of these solutions would do IMHO:

  1. Treat percentage as "percent points" instead of the current percentage of the current ICC/LUT state. Percent points would thus be an absolute scale all the time (not relative as they are now).
  2. Remove the 1..100 interval limitation and allow negative numbers on input (i.e. change the interval to -100..100).
  3. Allow deferred application of the resulting computation (i.e. "transactionally" without flickering) from a chain of operations in one xcalib invocation like e.g. gstreamer does. Imagine writing xcalib -a -c ! -a -co 50 would dry-run consecutively xcalib -a -c and then xcalib -a -co 50 internally but thanks to the "deferred" behavior it would apply to the screen only the resulting numbers effectively avoiding the flicker.

WDYT?

@dumblob dumblob changed the title Remove the 1..100 contrast limitation Remove the 1..100 contrast limitation to avoid flicker Mar 15, 2023
@dumblob dumblob mentioned this issue Oct 7, 2023
@beku
Copy link
Member

beku commented Dec 29, 2023

Would it help to avoid flicker, when xcalib accepts a profile without VCGT + gamma arguments (-gammacor XXX -red ...)?
Thus xcalib -c is not needed. (At the moment only xcalib vcgt.icc -gammacor XXX -red ... works without -a altering.)

@beku beku added the question label Dec 29, 2023
@dumblob
Copy link
Author

dumblob commented Apr 12, 2024

Hi Kai! Sorry for not noticing your response.

Actually yes, getting rid of xcalib -c seems would solve my issue. It just seemed too much of a rework of xcalib to propose this solution 😉 (compared to the patch I have put together with a hot needle).

By the way, do you know about any similar initiative for Wayland? Missing xcalib and vibrant-cli are the major reasons why I am still staying with X.

@beku
Copy link
Member

beku commented Apr 30, 2024 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants