Misc editorial cleanup

[jeremyselan]

page 1: maybe an explicit version number as well as the date?

page 8: footnote 5: perhaps add comments to the fact that CIE 1931
curves were derived from a relatively small number of observers, and
make explicit the fact that narrow spectrum primaries mean that you
can measure a specific x,y that is perceived quite differently (x,y =
.313, .329 looking green on some LED backlit devices for instance).

page 9: some pucks are spectroradiometers (eyeOne Pro?), talk about
filters for colorimeters?

page 11: "while colors colors far apart"
page 11: "for precise graphics representations" -> "for precised
graphical representations" ?

page 12: would add Rec.709 as a common color encoding (although of
course very similar to sRGB)

page 12: "it is a meaning abstraction" -> "it is a meaningful abstraction"

page 13: some of the references in the PDF don't seem to point to
anything, for instance [Poynton 12]?

page 13: perhaps a small set of curves showing linear data being
converted to pre-gamma corrected, then having the native display
transformation applied by the display resulting in a linear light
output could make things clearer?

page 14: the note about "this transfer function approximates a 2.2
gamma over the range of [0,1]" may not be as clear as needed unless
you already know the equations: maybe something like "this transfer
function approximages a 2.2 gamma over the range of [0,1] when using
the simplified model of L=V^gamma which is often found" or something
like that?

page 15: mention that Rec.709 is same primaries as sRGB with different
gamma? I know that this is film centric, but Rec.709 is used in a
number of pipelines, and is fairly frequent in DI workflows (if only
when mastering for BluRay)

page 15: "there is always remains a portion of the pipe" -> "there
always remains a portion of the pipe"

page 16: "scene-occlusions" "scene-geometry" : hyphen necessarY?

page 17: table introduces "lux" as a unit without defining it?
page 17, but also elsewhere: pet peave of mine, us of "it's" rather
than "it is" seems out of place in an otherwise rather formal document
page 17: "you just have very small positive number of photons" -> "you
just have a very small positive number of photons" or "you just have
verysmall positive numbers of photons" (is "positive" necessary here?)
page 17: not sure where this would go, but maybe a note stating that
monitor specifications claiming a specific "contrast ratio" are
meaningless without specifying what the baseline reference luminance
you are measuring against?

page 18: "In modern visual effects an color pipelines" -> not sure
what this should be, is the "an" spurious?

page 19: "the color community is continues to be religiously split on
this issue" -> "is" or "continues to be", not both
page 19: does camera characterization ever require coming up with a
full 3D LUT? Are there cases where is there is crosstalk between the
channels (or maybe if you are trying to undo some arbitrary internal
processing done by the camera?)

page 19: "Surprisingly ... On the first glance this may be surprising"
-> can remove initial "Surprisingly" and maintain intent

page 20: "as a consequence of display’s surround viewing environment"
-> "as a consequence of the surrounding viewing environment of the
display"
page 20: "shockingly consistent" -> seems a bit harsh, how about
"satisfyingly consistent"?
page 20: "In traditional film imaging process" -> "In the traditional
film imaging process"
page 20: "beyond the range of most modern digital cameras": is this
still true with the latest crop of digital cameras? Would "beyond the
range of any but the most receny digital cameras" or something like
that?
page 20: "high-dynamic range" : a question, but "low dynamic range",
"wide dynamic range" is written without a hyphen, and there are
instances of "high dynamic range" as well (page 18), would be best to
be consistent

page 21: "motion picture" followed by "motion-picture", other locations as well.
page 21: "HDR scene-acquisition" -> "HDR scene acquisition" ?
page 21: does it make sense to add a note that tone mapping to an sRGB
display (say) is the concatenation of a "eye pleasing" transformation
on the scene referred data with the gamma curve of the display?

page 23: "which log flavor was using in encoding" -> "which log flavor
was used in encoding"

page 24: "pipeline rigorously manages the both color transformations"
-> "pipeline rigorously manages the color transformations"

page 25: "Animated Feature" vs "Animated-Feature"
page 25: Recent versions of DI systems can deal directly with linear /
scene referred data, for instance supporting the Sony F65 camera
natively

page 26: early on in the critical first step in crafting -> early on
is the critical first step in crafting...
page 26: Companies that historically have historically done DI include
Deluxe and Technicolor. -> Companies that have historically done DI
include Deluxe and Technicolor.
I would probably add eFilm and Company3 as big players in DI, although
they are both part of Deluxe now.