Andprayforrain
Member
From Chriscrawfordphoto in the Monitors Advice thread:
Why D65? Why not, for example, D50, which is closer to sunlight and not as visibly cool as D65?
Why D65? Why not, for example, D50, which is closer to sunlight and not as visibly cool as D65?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
A monitor set to D50 will look very yellow/red and will not match the look of the prints. It doesn't make sense, but it is true. I've read articles written by color management experts like Andrew Rodney and the late Bruce Fraser who believed it was because the native white point of Monitors is a much higher color temp, a little cooler even than D65. Forcing them to D50 is too much of a change. That's about all I could find on it. I know I've been setting screens to D65 for more then 20 years and my prints matched my screens.
PRJ
Another Day in Paradise
Depends on the monitor frankly. Some can do D50 no problem. I have used both off and on over the years, again, depending on the monitor. Back in the day the CRT monitors that were made could easily be set for D50 and for color matching that was the best so it became the standard. Over the years monitor backlighting has changed which throws a wrench in the works. From CRTs to Fluorescent to LEDs. My advice for what to use would depend on what you are doing with your computer. If you print then D50 would be the way to go but only if you can get there. Judging prints needs to be done the right way as well if you go down the proverbial rabbit hole, so you need a viewing booth or a full spectrum light source optimized for the task. Basically that is how professionals have been doing it for decades. At home you are probably better off using dead reckoning. Look at your print under various lights and see if you have a problem. Keep in mind too that most prints will be viewed under a 3200 source, but today there are many "daylight" bulbs too. My point to this is unless you are under controlled conditions it is a bit of a crapshoot. If you are not printing then it isn't as critical because your eye will adapt to the brightest white in your vision, so as long as the brightest white is on the monitor and you have it calibrated and profiled, you will see pretty accurate color regardless of the white point you have set.
BernardL
Well-known
Which does not prove that D50 does not work. In fact it is a standard in the graphic arts.
You mean you have a D65 viewing booth?
When viewed next to a monitor, prints will look fine as long as the color temperatures of the monitor's white point and the illuminant of the print match.
Furthermore, most prints are viewed (by friends, customers, etc) not under a viewing hod. Why then does a print not look horribly red when viewed under halogen lighting (a high quality light source, common in galleries before the advent of LEDs) whose color temperature is about 3000-3200K, much warmer than D50? Because the eye-brain system adjusts automatically to the illuminant's white point, as long as (a) it is close to a blackbody (CRI); (b) there is no conflicting reference (e.g. a window open to a sunlit outside).
The CRI (color rendition index) is more important than the color temperature. Which is why fluorescents are awful, at least the ordinary ones.
Edit. My post duplicates in large art the previous post by PRJ. Should have read the whole thread. Hopefully the independent wording will help to convey the message.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Xrite, makers of the i1 Display monitor calibration system, recommends D65:
https://www.xrite.com/service-support/why_calibrate_monitor_to_d65_when_light_booth_is_d50
They quoted from a book by Andrew Rodney that I mentioned: Color Management For Photographers.
https://www.xrite.com/service-support/why_calibrate_monitor_to_d65_when_light_booth_is_d50
They quoted from a book by Andrew Rodney that I mentioned: Color Management For Photographers.