A
AndyCapp
Guest
Yesterday my Mac told me that 1.8 is OK if you are working in a dimmed light while in normal office light 2.2 works better.
X-rite Display Pro needs an upgrade to work with Sonoma. Waiting.
Darkness prevails.
- Thread starter AndyCapp
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies: Replies 52
- Views: Views 2K
X-rite Display Pro needs an upgrade to work with Sonoma. Waiting.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I still don’t understand the relationship between a display’s gamma versus nits (or if there is one)?
What Are Brightness Nits? Why Screen Brightness Matters
All displays have a certain amount of nits, indicating brightness. But what are nits exactly, and why should you care?www.makeuseof.com
As I understand it, the gamma setting affects the tonal curve used to display images on the screen. Brightness affects all tones, but gamma affects the position of the mid-tones in relation to the whites and blacks (which are not affected by the gamma setting). I may be wrong on that; it is hard to find info on this, but the little I have found seems to point to that definition.
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
That makes sense Chris.
Freakscene
Obscure member
There isn’t a relationship. One is brightness, one is contrast.I still don’t understand the relationship between a display’s gamma versus nits (or if there is one)?
What Are Brightness Nits? Why Screen Brightness Matters
All displays have a certain amount of nits, indicating brightness. But what are nits exactly, and why should you care?
Most calibration devices give you a brightness reading in cd/m² or cm².
Marty
Last edited:
A
AndyCapp
Guest
The easiest way to understand it is to go to the monitor preferences, play with it, and see what happens.
lynnb
Mentor
It would help if you could link one of the images you perceive as dark so that others can look on their devices and give you their impression
A
AndyCapp
Guest
Zuiko-logist
Well-known
as commented in the other thread, the foreground looks underexposed/ does not seem to correlate with a clear sky, but the shadow details are there. The foreground itself is low contrast/fairly monotone.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I see on the third page it was figured out to look at the problem, not just describing it.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Link provides entire page with photos. They looks not affected by monitor brightness to me. Just how it is exposed, processed. With sky been in priority. I do same (trying to) and work on darks in PP, but nothing crazy as trying to show things in the deep shadows. I'm not fan of reincarnated HDR stile of images, with unnaturally highlighted objects in the shadows.
AndersG
Well-known
The recent three posts are about this image by me:
Message # 73 in the thread about rocks. (It might be somewhat underexposed.)
My screen is old and not calibrated so I don't know how it looks to others.
Another image by me in that thread Message #69 this looks nearly overexposed on my screen but it was a bright day.
Message # 73 in the thread about rocks. (It might be somewhat underexposed.)
My screen is old and not calibrated so I don't know how it looks to others.
Another image by me in that thread Message #69 this looks nearly overexposed on my screen but it was a bright day.
Last edited:
Mos6502
Well-known
I hope you don't mind my using your image here, but since you asked: to me it looks ok. It is a little low contrast though. However I decided I want to check something. I put your image into PS and looked at the histogram. Although most of the values are in the low end, it did show that we have a full span of values from white to black. However, sometimes color images can be deceiving, so I desaturated the image and looked again. Now we get a different story. The image does not contain a full range of value. If you set the color image according to the histogram for the monochrome image, you will get a result that has what looks like "normal" contrast.
Attachments
Zuiko-logist
Well-known
Thank you. For me at least, this is helpful.