Shel Belinkoff:
You really can't tell anything unless the monitors are
all calibrated to the same standard. You may be able
to fiddle around with the images and view it on different
monitors and get some sort of compromise,
Yes, it was such a compromise I was looking for.
but unless
the
-
From: Anders Hultman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 4:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Monitor latitude
Shel Belinkoff:
You really can't tell anything unless the monitors are
all calibrated to the same standard. You may be able
to fiddle around
they don't even hope. make it look good and make sure you save in sRGB color
space. i assume you are working on a calibrated monitor.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Anders Hultman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 5:49 AM
Subject: Re: Monitor
No ... looking good on your screen doesn't mean it will look good on
another screen. There are several ways to calibrate a monitor.
Probably the simplest (and least effective, but better than nothing) is
the program that comes with Photoshop, Adobe Gamma.
Another is ColorVision by Pantone. This
But that's totally backwards. You want the print to look like
what you see on the monitor. The moment you make a print
with a different profile - perhaps as a result of changing labs,
using a different paper, getting a different printer - you're back
to square one.
Len Paris wrote:
Yes,
No ... looking good on your screen doesn't
mean it will
look good on
another screen. There are several ways to calibrate a monitor.
Probably the simplest (and least effective, but better than nothing) is
the program that comes with Photoshop, Adobe
Ah Ha.
And there in lies one of my problems.
As i mentioned in a reply,i have used the Adobe Gama adjustments on the monitor,and
sometimes i
use non Canon paper.Mostly Ilford Classic Gloss or Pearl. I notice a big difference in
the
prints between
Canon and Ilford.I have to adjust curves up so
First, Dave, Adobe Gamma is only a so-so method of calibration. Yes, it's better than
nothing, but
the spyder is better yet. If you've got Adobe Gamma working properly it will make the
established
adjustments by itself. However, over time, monitors drift, and they need
recalibration at more
You're beginning to get it now, Dave ;-)) I'm sure some of the better informed list
members
will jump in and correct any of my misconceptions, but I ~think~ I've got the concept
pretty
much correct.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah Ha.
And there in lies one of my problems.
As i mentioned in a
, January 10, 2004 7:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Monitor latitude
But that's totally backwards. You want the print to look like
what you see on the monitor. The moment you make a print
with a different profile - perhaps as a result of changing labs,
using a different paper, getting
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 2:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Monitor latitude
Ah Ha.
And there in lies one of my problems.
As i mentioned in a reply,i have used the Adobe Gama
adjustments
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 7:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Working with adjustment:was Monitor latitude
First, Dave, Adobe Gamma is only a so-so method of
calibration. Yes, it's better than nothing, but
the spyder is better yet. If you've got
Yeah, I have ... or rather, I should say I've seen the screen change with
different lab profiles as I've not yet gotten to using different paper
profiles. However, I believe I've seen changes on one of my lab's
monitors when the owner was showing me how my photo might look on
different paper
Really? But how do people do this, generally?
Just make it look good on their own screen and hope for the best?
anders
Somewhat. However, if any of your computers has Photoshop or Elements you
can run Adobe Gamma. I have found that will give me a close enough look to
any commercial output as to
Hi Len,
I just ran a test, and here's what I found: using the calibrated monitor
the image with the ARGB profile looked more saturated and brighter than
the lab profiles. And while the lab glossy and matte profile were very
different to tell apart from one another, using the Info tool showed
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Working with adjustment:was Monitor latitude
Yeah, I have ... or rather, I should say I've seen the screen
change with
different lab profiles as I've not yet gotten to using different paper
profiles. However, I believe I've seen changes on one of my lab's
Ah Ha.
And there in lies one of my problems.
As I mentioned in a reply,I have used the Adobe Gamma adjustments on the
monitor,and
sometimes I
use non Canon paper.Mostly Ilford Classic Gloss or Pearl. I notice a big
difference in the
prints between
Canon and Ilford.I have to adjust curves up so the
: Saturday, January 10, 2004 10:37 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Working with adjustment:was Monitor latitude
Yeah, I have ... or rather, I should say I've seen the screen
change with
different lab profiles as I've not yet gotten to using different paper
profiles. However, I believe I've
Hi there, Len ... I just checked to be sure. I've now run three paper
profiles on my monitor, and all have a different look.
Len Paris wrote:
By the way. Everybody should note the change of direction here. Shel
suddenly switched venues here. He hasn't seen the changes on his
monitor. It's
I didn't say printer profiles. I said paper profiles.
Now ~you've~ changed the venue from paper to printer LOL
Len Paris wrote:
I've been doing this for years now. I've never seen my monitor change
when I changed printer profiles.
Yeah, I have ... or rather, I should say I've seen the
: Working with adjustment:was Monitor latitude
Hi there, Len ... I just checked to be sure. I've now run three paper
profiles on my monitor, and all have a different look.
Len Paris wrote:
By the way. Everybody should note the change of direction
here. Shel
suddenly switched venues here
: Saturday, January 10, 2004 11:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Working with adjustment:was Monitor latitude
I didn't say printer profiles. I said paper profiles.
Now ~you've~ changed the venue from paper to printer LOL
Len Paris wrote:
I've been doing this for years now. I've
Just replying to the thread in general.
There seems to be a bit of confusion on profiles, color spaces and color
management, in general. No surprise. The topic is complex and most of
what is written in the popular press doesn't help much.
Here are three resources that may help, the first two
No, Herb, I'm not. I'm loading four identical photos with different profiles on
to the screen at the same time. One has ARGB embedded, one Pictopia Matte, one
Pictopia Glossy, and one Adorama Glossy. All four look different. Pictopia is
a custom lab in the area and Adorama has their profiles
On 8 Jan 2004 at 20:32, Anders Hultman wrote:
As you can see, it's the same picture but the second one is made
brighter in Photoshop. He and I have looked at the two files on six
or so different monitors and they look quite different from monitor
to monitor. On most, I'd say that the
How should the image be processed to make it look good on all (or most)
screens? I don't want any blown highlights and I don't want the dark parts
to loose detail either.
anders
-
http://anders.hultman.nu/
I think it is more important that the monitors are set to one
Hultman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 2:32 PM
Subject: Monitor latitude
A friend of mine showed me these two pictures of himself:
http://henrik.net/dagensbild/img/040106.jpg
http://henrik.net/dagensbild/img/040106_ljus.jpg
How
On Thursday, Jan 8, 2004, at 18:35 America/New_York, mapson wrote:
calibrating all monitors in the world is a project beyond my wildest
dreams.
Sir Tony Hoare should have listed that as one of his Grand Challenges.
--jc
28 matches
Mail list logo
