x-ray
Mentor
A brightness of 120 is what my system recommended (x-rite I think) and I seems to work for me.
I’ve Had several systems over the years depending on what type of monitor I used. Originally I used CRTs because that’s all there was and for some time now I’ve used LED. Actually I liked the LaCie CRT monitors that I had better but was forced to use LED and they do the job.
I agree that laptop screens aren’t optimal for precise work. I’ve been through a lot of PC and Apple laptops over the years and never found one I could reliably edit on. They’re certainly better than they were twenty years ago but no way will they replace a dedicated monitor.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
x-ray
Mentor
If you’re screen isn’t calibrated then the chances of it being correct are pretty low. Monitors as a rule are setup at the factory to make things look pretty not to make them look correct. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a monitor straight from the factory that was setup correctly.
I’ve noticed different computers video cards produce different results on the same monitor. My wife has a Mac Pro tower just like mine except the video card in my was replaced and the setup on the same monitor is totally different.
My monitor has dual input channels and on A I run my Mac Pro tower on B I put a Mac Mini but the setup was drastically different.
If your monitor is correct from the factory you should rush out and buy a lottery ticket. Your chances are about the same.
Another reason, some people because of the lighting in their environment like a different color temperature setup other than 6500K. Some want 5500 and others may select different temps. Also there are two gamma setups 1.8 and 2.2 and will dramatically influence your image. Then there’s Adobe RGB then SRGB. Adobe is for litho CMYK printing and SRGB is internet. Then you have different brightness settings. 120 candles Is considered standard but some use different depending on environmental lighting.
I hope this helps. It something everyone needs to understand and apply to their workflow.
ItsNottheFstop
Newbie
As an aside, one of the great things about the Apple products is that you can calibrate any Retina monitor - on any device. So you can colour manage your phone, and your iPad, as well as whatever monitor you use.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Amen.
While I got distracted in some of x-ray's technical details, what a calibrated monitor means to me is that everyone else with a calibrated monitor sees your photos exactly the way you wanted them to look and when your print them, the prints will look like your monitor.
x-ray
Mentor
I have a bad habit of getting a little too deep into details. 😁
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
I appreciate all the wisdom and insights from you and others sharing their depth of knowledge and experience. Although I might not use most of it, it is good to be archived here on RFF and readily available for future reference.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
More details the better! I asked a techie photographer friend yesterday and he said to buy an external monitor but didn’t go into it. Thanks for the info.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
I understand that everyone who calibrates their monitor gets an individual setting. If someone makes a picture on his calibrated monitor and sends it to, say, the Rangefinderforum, will that individual calibration then interpreted and recalibrated by the Rangefinderforum?
If not, there will be on the Rangefinderforum a cacophony of photos because they were all made with different calibrations.
However, if the Rangefinderforum recalibrates all photos, it wouldn't be necessary for the photo contributor to calibrate his or her own monitor. Is this right?
Erik.
GMOG
Established
No. All the RFF does, and any other website, is display a file. If we want that file to be seen as intended it is important for monitors on both ends of the process to be calibrated. I, as the creator of an image, calibrate my monitors so I can be reasonably certain that the image will display or print and appear as I intend. Calibrating my monitors also allows me to see other peoples' images as they intend them to be seen. Calibration sets standards on both ends so that this is possible. The RFF or any other website has nothing to do with this.
The cacophony of differences in how images are seen on different systems occurs when monitors at either end of the equation are not calibrated.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
Then the question arises why the makers of the monitors do not ensure that their monitors are calibrated. Their customers are now in misery. They have to pay a considerable amount of money to solve the problems. I find that rather strange.
Erik.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I would start with larger monitor and spider.
It is important to have decent and correct view on pictures before worrying about printing.
It is important to have decent and correct view on pictures before worrying about printing.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Because monitors tend to go out of alligment and it depends on the light in area where monitor is.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
They should make monitors that will not go out of alignment. Imagine a car that suddenly is going left while the driver is steering right!
Or they should inform their users how to correct the deviations.
Erik.
Or they should inform their users how to correct the deviations.
Erik.
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
Hey, what ever happened to horizontal (HTOL) and vertical (VCAL) hold? 😋
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
That's impossible with current technology. The backlight used in monitors gets dimmer and changes color over time. For graphics work, monitors are turned down in brightnes; They come set way too bright from the factory so that people can see brighter color when watching youtube videos and such.
Cars need periodic adjustments to their wheel alignments. Hitting potholes and normal wear and tear gradually knocks the wheels and suspension system out of alignment. If its severely misaligned, the car will vibrate at high speeds and it reduces tire life. For best performance, a car that is driven daily should have an alignment yearly. If you have to replace a suspension or steering part, like a tierod end or a strut, then an alignment is also needed.
Most of the other things that needed periodic calibration on cars, like ignition timing, is now controlled by computer and never needs adjustment.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
Maybe they can make the computer control the monitor! That's a good idea!
Why didn't they come up with that earlier? I have had a computer and a monitor for more than twenty years, but I have never heard of this problem before. Yes, from time to time a monitor died. Or is it that computers are now more refined so that these problems became evident?
Erik.
x-ray
Mentor
Because every computer is slightly different and as I mentioned above there’s no single standard. The standard for calibration depends on the final use of the image. Most people however calibrate to view images on the internet to a single standard.
Calibrating a monitor corrects that monitor and system for errors in color and tone inherent in the manufacturing process of the monitor and system. The profile generated tells the system how to display the image to correct those manufactured errors in the system or monitor and tells it to display to that standard.
Confusing but what it does is the only way to achieve your image will be displayed the way you intend on other calibrated monitors. If other monitors aren’t calibrated then who knows what your image will look like. It’s each photographers responsibility to calibrate their own system.
x-ray
Mentor
They did come up with this earlier. Monitor calibration has been around since day one.
I ran a photo, motion picture and video department for a large ad agency’s we used Ikegami color monitors that cost $10,000 in the 70’s. They differed from TV sets by not enhancing the image out of our cameras. The displayed only what the camera output.
Those monitors were calibrated daily. It was a little different process but they were calibrated to the NTSC standard. Other parts of the world used different standards and at that time we’re not interchangeable.
I know from my personal experience that computer monitor calibration has been around over 30 years.
As far as expense, a calibration system can be fought for about 100 euros. And some monitors have modules built in but they are in the 2.000 euro and up price range.
I think you’re over thinking this. Just accept this is the way it works and get a calibrator and see the world as it was intended.
Very simple😊
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I use an Xrite Display Pro colorimeter and its software to do the calibration and generate a profile, set that on the system.
Glossy or matte screen makes little difference once you have a colorimeter and properly calibrate/profile your display. The major benefit of a matte screen is the that it is less susceptible to reflections from ambient lighting, in some circumstances, although more in others (scatter from white walls in a bright room can cause a matte screen to have a perceptual haze). Gloss screens in bright circumstances allow specular reflections, but when shaded from such light sources do not change the nature of the image on the LCD behind them.
The three elements of calibration are luminance, gamma curve, and white point. The standard luminance of most desktop displays is set very high to combat typical office lighting with bright lights and white walls, the gamma curve is set high (2.1 or so) to increase contrast and "pop", and the white point is usually set up near 6000°K. To my eye, this is a terrible photo editing setup and does not match the lighting I shoot for, which is gallery lighting: I keep my office illumination modest to match that, even, and slightly warm in color, down near 5500°K. So I calibrate to output 120 lumens, gamma 1.8, and white point 5600°K.
Laptop displays tend to be far more variable than desktop displays because they need to be small, light, and conserve as much power as possible to enhance battery life... which is why if you normally use a laptop as your primary computer, you should have a good desktop display attached for when you want to do proper image editing.
I wrote articles on color management setup and use years and years ago now. I wonder if I can find them. I have not changed my setups and methodologies since I moved to LCD displays around 2003, and the output of my prints produced with the color managed workflow I defined then continues to be exactly as expected when I test.
G
Glossy or matte screen makes little difference once you have a colorimeter and properly calibrate/profile your display. The major benefit of a matte screen is the that it is less susceptible to reflections from ambient lighting, in some circumstances, although more in others (scatter from white walls in a bright room can cause a matte screen to have a perceptual haze). Gloss screens in bright circumstances allow specular reflections, but when shaded from such light sources do not change the nature of the image on the LCD behind them.
The three elements of calibration are luminance, gamma curve, and white point. The standard luminance of most desktop displays is set very high to combat typical office lighting with bright lights and white walls, the gamma curve is set high (2.1 or so) to increase contrast and "pop", and the white point is usually set up near 6000°K. To my eye, this is a terrible photo editing setup and does not match the lighting I shoot for, which is gallery lighting: I keep my office illumination modest to match that, even, and slightly warm in color, down near 5500°K. So I calibrate to output 120 lumens, gamma 1.8, and white point 5600°K.
Laptop displays tend to be far more variable than desktop displays because they need to be small, light, and conserve as much power as possible to enhance battery life... which is why if you normally use a laptop as your primary computer, you should have a good desktop display attached for when you want to do proper image editing.
I wrote articles on color management setup and use years and years ago now. I wonder if I can find them. I have not changed my setups and methodologies since I moved to LCD displays around 2003, and the output of my prints produced with the color managed workflow I defined then continues to be exactly as expected when I test.
G