Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Why the Big Difference in LCD Brightness Settings?  (Read 15186 times)
jashley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« on: March 03, 2008, 10:50:09 AM »
ReplyReply

If I remember correctly Jeff Schewe says in the C2P tutorial that he uses an LCD brightness setting around 140, but MR seemed surprised by that and said he was under 120 (might have even said 110).  And I see Andrew Rodney recommends 150.

It appears MR is using a "standard" print viewing set-up, and I would assume that Jeff and Andrew do, too.  I tried 150 to start with my NEC 2190 but it was way too bright.  I ended up at the manufacturer's recommended setting of 120, which gives an almost dead-on screen to print match.   I print on a 4800 with IP and a 2200 with the Epson driver, all custom profiles, and view with an Ott-Lite.

Really curious to hear from those who get the best match in the 140-150 range and how you view your prints.
Logged
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1055



WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2008, 01:46:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Can't really accurately determine what the correct brightness/overall luminance level should be on an LCD without SEEING the brightness level of surrounding ambient light. As long as it matches your prints, reaching a cd/m2 target number seems too subjective to one's own eyesight.

I have my 2004 iMac set to 95cd/m2 to match a print viewed directly under GE 5000K Sunshine 18" T8 flotube. Anything higher produces way too much glare compared to the print.
Logged
jashley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2008, 08:35:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Can't really accurately determine what the correct brightness/overall luminance level should be on an LCD without SEEING the brightness level of surrounding ambient light. As long as it matches your prints, reaching a cd/m2 target number seems too subjective to one's own eyesight.

I have my 2004 iMac set to 95cd/m2 to match a print viewed directly under GE 5000K Sunshine 18" T8 flotube. Anything higher produces way too much glare compared to the print.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=178903\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes I'm sure ambient light has a lot to do with it; even so, I remember AR saying on another forum that "115 is way too low for anything but an aging LCD" and Michael is below that, and you're at 95.  Still kind of puzzled as to how you wouldn't end up with prints that were too dark at 150.
Logged
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2008, 01:10:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Just to toss in another data point, I found that 100 cd/m2 matches my prints quite well.  That's using a brand-new NEC 2690 in a room with moderately dim home lighting, and comparing with prints viewed under a frosted skylight with direct sun on it.  Not exactly well-controlled conditions in my case, but that's what works for me.

Lisa
Logged

jackbingham
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2008, 04:42:37 PM »
ReplyReply

While it would be great to have a standard, unfortunately we have two issues without. There is no hard and fast rule for how dim you can drive an lcd. It is dependent upon that very lcd. Many newer lcd's from Apple and NEC perform better at higher luminance levels than say an Eizo. But we have seen substantial variation from monitor to monitor of the same model too. As for how bright is right, as has been stated a number of times here, you need to base you screen luminance on your ambient conditions and your perception of how those two things line up. There are no hard and fast rules here either. Clearly this is more complicated now that we not only need to consider ambient conditions but wildly varying monitor behavior. Unfortunately that is where we are. find the sweet spot for your monitor and then, if need be adjust your ambient conditions to match. or if possible adjust your monitor down to your ambient conditions. 2 variables, oh so many choices!
Logged

Jack Bingham
Integrated Color Corp Makers of Coloreyes Display
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1055



WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2008, 12:56:48 AM »
ReplyReply

And these luminance/brightness variances even between models makes me wonder if whatever the cd/m2 number comes out to be if Soft Proofing with paper white and ink black previews are affected.

How accurate could these luminance numbers be if all of us are all over the map with these varied LCD displays?
Logged
jackbingham
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2008, 05:39:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Well it could be that instruments and software are not as precise as we would like, or that manufacturing of monitors is not as stable as we would like............or it could be that individual's perception is wildly variable or..........  Take your pick. I'll place most of my vote on 2 and 3. What really matters is that you can have the tools to stabilize your viewing conditions for your perception and maintain that because in general, instruments sensors and monitors are pretty stable. So once you've found the best settings for you, maintaining them is easy. Assuming we could have a standard for us all to use ignores the huge number of variables in the process.
Logged

Jack Bingham
Integrated Color Corp Makers of Coloreyes Display
rovanpera
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2008, 12:36:54 PM »
ReplyReply

The Eizo CG warranty for display accuracy states that the monitor brightness should not be set above 100cd.
Logged
jashley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #8 on: March 05, 2008, 01:55:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Eizo CG warranty for display accuracy states that the monitor brightness should not be set above 100cd.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179352\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's fascinating, and just causes my puzzlement at a recommendation of 150 to grow.  Makes sense given the responses so far though, which seem to be clustered around MR's 110.  Yes, it's a small "sample", however, two other photogs I know are at 115 and 120 with newer NEC's.

Still would like to hear from someone who's settled on anything around 150 and what lighting conditions they process/view under.
Logged
Tim Lookingbill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1055



WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2008, 02:12:07 PM »
ReplyReply

I can tell LCD manufacturers are intentionally making their displays brighter. The other day I saw a huge one used as a video billboard at a car dealership I passed along the freeway and it was blazingly bright with an insane contrast ratio that seemed brighter than the midday daylight viewed under.

It just stuck out among all the other billboards. The images in the commercials it was playing seemed very correct looking with very dense blacks and bright whites.

It's probably going to be cited as a traffic hazard due to its distracting eyes off the road.
Logged
Hermie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2008, 03:50:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Eizo CG warranty for display accuracy states that the monitor brightness should not be set above 100cd.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

"The warranty period of the backlight is warranted only if the monitors are used within the recommended brightness of up to and including 100 cd/m2 for the CG221/CG211 and 120 cd/m2 for the CG241W with the color temperature between 5,000 K-6,500 K"

See [a href=\"http://www.eizo.com/support/warranty/index.asp]http://www.eizo.com/support/warranty/index.asp[/url]
Logged
MarkF
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #11 on: March 05, 2008, 10:50:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's fascinating, and just causes my puzzlement at a recommendation of 150 to grow.  Makes sense given the responses so far though, which seem to be clustered around MR's 110.  Yes, it's a small "sample", however, two other photogs I know are at 115 and 120 with newer NEC's.

Still would like to hear from someone who's settled on anything around 150 and what lighting conditions they process/view under.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179370\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm at 140cd/m and much happier than at 120. The monitor is a Samsung 214T calibrated with an Eye One. I use custom profiles for all my lab work and have a much better match now. My office is fairly bright, huge windows with reflected (not direct) daylight, so that may explain it. Thanks must go to Mr Rodney for suggesting ramping up the luminance.

Hope this helps,
Logged
jashley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2008, 09:21:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm at 140cd/m and much happier than at 120. The monitor is a Samsung 214T calibrated with an Eye One. I use custom profiles for all my lab work and have a much better match now. My office is fairly bright, huge windows with reflected (not direct) daylight, so that may explain it. Thanks must go to Mr Rodney for suggesting ramping up the luminance.

Hope this helps,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179480\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, this makes sense.  I was going to suggest earlier that people at 140-150 are probably working in essentially standard office lighting, and there you go.   Seems like there may be a divide between people doing "personal" work (landscape, nature, etc.) who likely work by themselves and prefer to process in more subdued lighting, and people doing commerical work in office conditions.
Logged
Satch
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2008, 11:32:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes, this makes sense.  I was going to suggest earlier that people at 140-150 are probably working in essentially standard office lighting, and there you go.   Seems like there may be a divide between people doing "personal" work (landscape, nature, etc.) who likely work by themselves and prefer to process in more subdued lighting, and people doing commerical work in office conditions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179577\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sounds likely, but if as you say Andrew Rodney has made a blanket assertion that "115 is way too low for anything but an aging LCD" I still find that baffling, especially considering what was posted here about Eizo monitors.  

Andrew, I see that you are active on this forum and would bet that you're following this thread.  Please comment.
Logged
jashley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2008, 12:24:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Sounds likely, but if as you say Andrew Rodney has made a blanket assertion that "115 is way too low for anything but an aging LCD" I still find that baffling, especially considering what was posted here about Eizo monitors. 

Andrew, I see that you are active on this forum and would bet that you're following this thread.  Please comment.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Here's where AR made the "115 is way too low..." comment.  Sounds fairly "blanket", I'd say.

[a href=\"http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00O5wU]http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00O5wU[/url]
Logged
rovanpera
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2008, 01:29:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"The warranty period of the backlight is warranted only if the monitors are used within the recommended brightness of up to and including 100 cd/m2 for the CG221/CG211 and 120 cd/m2 for the CG241W with the color temperature between 5,000 K-6,500 K"

See http://www.eizo.com/support/warranty/index.asp
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Oh I didn't know that. Mine says 100.

I remember a few years ago trying to calibrate a new acd 20" to 100cd. Could not do it. Brightness set to zero was something like 110.
Logged
MarkF
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2008, 05:06:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"The warranty period of the backlight is warranted only if the monitors are used within the recommended brightness of up to and including 100 cd/m2 for the CG221/CG211 and 120 cd/m2 for the CG241W with the color temperature between 5,000 K-6,500 K"

See http://www.eizo.com/support/warranty/index.asp
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was thinking of buying an Eizo as the Samsung is not uniform in it's illumination, but may not now as I know I will void the warranty by running it at 140cd/m2. What to buy? NEC is not really an option as the "good" software to drive it is only available in the US (I'm in Aus)
Logged
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1905



WWW
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2008, 05:11:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
NEC is not really an option as the "good" software to drive it is only available in the US (I'm in Aus)

Look harder - I have a 2690 Wuxi with SpectraView II in Australia and the software is 'out-there'
Logged

dlashier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518



WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2008, 10:42:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Sounds likely, but if as you say Andrew Rodney has made a blanket assertion that "115 is way too low for anything but an aging LCD" I still find that baffling
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

While in general I respect AR's knowledge and advice, he has been known to make blanket baseless assertions on occasion

- DL
« Last Edit: March 06, 2008, 10:42:27 PM by dlashier » Logged

jackbingham
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 07, 2008, 05:57:04 AM »
ReplyReply

There is no compelling reason to run all LCDs at 140 or any other number for that matter. There are displays, like the apple and NEC that behave better at higher luminance levels. If you work in a moderately well lit room then that could be another reason. However, if you work in subdued lighting and want a monitor that will work at 120 or less, buy one that responds well to those conditions. There are plenty of LCDs that work perfectly well at 120 or 100 and there is no reason supplied from Mt Olympus that would compel you to do otherwise.
Most of you are photographers.........use your eyes. Find the best solution for you. Ignore what anybody tells you if they say THIS IS THE NUMBER, which by the way Andrew is not saying. He has his recommendations based on his environment and his equipment.  He determined them by using his eyes. They do not necessarily apply to you.
Logged

Jack Bingham
Integrated Color Corp Makers of Coloreyes Display
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad