This is by design. The numerical values represent true intensity of the R, G, B channels. In RWPaint, for example a value of 40 represents an intensity in the middle of 30 and 50. This is not the case in other editors, because the sRGB and its gamma of 2.2 is not linear. All this complexity is hidden in RWPaint and a value of 50% actually means half-intensity. I would recommend to leave the gamma at 2.2, the setting may even disappear in new versions.

Do you actually need to copy the numerical value between editors? If yes, there is the hexadecimal code below and that follows the sRGB color profile.

"This is by design. The numerical values represent true intensity of the R, G, B channels. In RWPaint, for example a value of 40 represents an intensity in the middle of 30 and 50. This is not the case in other editors, because the sRGB and its gamma of 2.2 is not linear. All this complexity is hidden in RWPaint and a value of 50% actually means half-intensity. I would recommend to leave the gamma at 2.2, the setting may even disappear in new versions.

Do you actually need to copy the numerical value between editors? If yes, there is the hexadecimal code below and that follows the sRGB color profile."

Thanks for the answer but the more i think about it the more i'm sure there's a bug.
I don't care about numeric values and i love the gamma correction and the color range option, so please don't cut them!

I'm convinced that there's a bug because with different values of gamma correction both the dropper and the palette work with a 2.2 gamma correction value.
The palette alway shows the gamma 2.2 color version of the RGBA values and the dropper always consider colors with a 2.2 gamma correction value, in fact if the real gamma correction value is lower it returns darker color values, if the gamma correction value is higher it returns brighter color values, only with 2.2 it returns the right color.

In my opinion what shows color in the palette and what returns values in the dropper don't take into account the gamma correction value.

I don't use the 2.2 gamma correction value because i think its colors are too bright, look at this comparison, the same values of grey(from 0 to 250) but with different gamma values, first line is 2.2, second line 1.1, third line 0:
http://s6.postimg.org/alun5y2ap/diff.png

In a sense you are right, the behavior is inconsistent. In earlier version, the gamma value set in the configuration affected the whole editor. In the latest version, I have redesigned the color picker and decided to slowly move away from the configurable gamma towards "it just works, no settings needed" approach. Currently, some parts of the application honor the gamma value from the configuration, others don't. So, it is best to keep it at 2.2. (BTW 0 is an invalid value, 1 is used instead)

On your image, the last line looks correct and it actually has a gamma of 2.2. The first line looks like the gamma correction was applied twice. Perhaps, if you told me how you made that image, I'll be able to pinpoint the problem.

I am aware that I am making some scenarios more difficult or even impossible by removing the customizable gamma setting. For example, if someone wants to use RWPaint to create textures for a 3D game and they want the textures to use linear colors (gamma = 1) and apply the final gamma within the 3D engine, there will be problems, they won't see the right colors in the editor. Eventually, RWPaint will support HDR with 32-bit floating point colors and it will be possible to select gamma while saving to formats that allow that. But it will still show colors in sRGB color space while editing. Having a calibrated display is highly recommended, because it is good to see the colors as they are supposed to be.

I made that image in RWP, i made the first one with a 2.2 gamma correction value, the first color has 0,0,0 RGB values, the second 10,10,10, the third 20,20,20 etc up to 250,250,250.
Then i made the second line with the same RGBA values of the first line after setting a 1.1 value and then the third after setting a 0 value.

I saw that my video card control panel in the color optimization options has a default gamma value of 1, is this the problem?

That looks strange, I tried to do the same and I am getting the 3rd line while having gamma at 2.2 (since the color picker ignores it, it does not really matter). Maybe... are you using the last version - 2013.1 and selecting the colors by typing the values into the boxes next to the color wheel+triangle?

The setting in your graphic card should not affect the editor. You can check how your system is calibrated by for example looking at this image: http://www.otake.com.mx/Apuntes/ColorCalibration/GammaPatterns.phtml When looking from far enough, the black and white lines should become gray that has the same intensity as the really gray box with 2.2.

"That looks strange, I tried to do the same and I am getting the 3rd line while having gamma at 2.2 (since the color picker ignores it, it does not really matter). Maybe... are you using the last version - 2013.1 and selecting the colors by typing the values into the boxes next to the color wheel+triangle?

The setting in your graphic card should not affect the editor. You can check how your system is calibrated by for example looking at this image: http://www.otake.com.mx/Apuntes/ColorCalibration/GammaPatterns.phtml When looking from far enough, the black and white lines should become gray that has the same intensity as the really gray box with 2.2."
I have the 2013 version but both the color picker and the numeric values give me the same colors.

I wanted to experiment combinations of vga and RWP gamma values and now i'm really confused lol.

Anyway i downloaded the 2011.1 version of RWP and for the moment i think i'll use this version.

Can i ask you why in the 2013 version you get rid of the Swatches(the custom color palette) panel? Or maybe i'm dumb and it's still there somewhere lol? I love to have an easy and fast access to colors i use the most, the lack of a custom palette panel was the only real big complaint i have for the 2013 version(well if i had no gamma problems lol).

Can i give you some wishes for the next version?
-Don't get rid of features, different people has different needs, more options are always better in my opinion
-1 RGBA value = 1 color, now if i use a low color scale one value corresponds to more colors
-return of the custom palette panel
-add the options to set the size of the grid and the size of the Pencil

... well that's all, i already really love the program as is. XD

Every suggestion is welcome . The swatches were removed, but it is likely that they will return in slightly different form. The reason was inconsistency. Things are easy when only one color is being used, but all gets complicated when multiple colors are needed simultanously. For example when drawing an ellipse with different interior and outline - 2 colors are needed. Or, when using linear or pattern fill instead of solid color. When you click on a color in the swatch, which color should be changed? It is not clear and may confuse people. For example in the older version, when gradient is selected, clicking on a color may or may not affect the gradient. That confuses people. So, in the future there will be a swatch of not just colors, but also for gradients or patterns. Clicking on an item within the future swatch will always do the same. I know that it will be better if the current version already had this feature, but if I waited until all features are there before releasing a new version, that version would never arrive. Software is never complete.

If you need a bigger pencil, the Brush tool may help.

Ok now i understand! It makes sense to modify the swatches.

Even with the blur setting at 0 the brush tool has some smooth and shaded edges, i would like a sizable brush with hard unshaded edges like the pencil.

Thank you for your patience and keep the good work!