Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: how come i could only see the detail on a non calibrated monitor?  (Read 2092 times)
Aristoc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199


« on: November 16, 2010, 06:37:04 AM »
ReplyReply

On my calibrated monitor at home, (2209WA, white lum = 95 ) I couldn't hardly see the bleed through in this photo (TIFF) at home. After saving the photo and uploading it to the web and looking at it on my work computer which is a cheap,non calibrated HP, I could really see the bleed through in the detail around the flower much easier . any thoughts why the difference? all the other colours looked great and it printed the way it looked on my calibrated monitor (that is, bleed through barely visible).

Thanks




« Last Edit: November 16, 2010, 06:56:46 AM by Aristoc » Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2010, 07:38:15 AM »
ReplyReply

[...] and it printed the way it looked on my calibrated monitor (that is, bleed through barely visible).
Ite missa est, isn't it?  Wink
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1312


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2010, 01:00:08 PM »
ReplyReply

With soft proofing enabled, a well calibrated display should show how the image looks when printed, granted, at a lower resolution. An uncalibrated display could show you a number of things, kinda like how you can see all kinda of things when you crank the exposure up for down several stops. If you crank exposure up several stops you might see lots of shadow detail you wouldn't otherwise.. If you crank exposure down you might see lots of delicate highlight detail that you wouldn't otherwise see as clearly...

If you're not seeing the highlight glow (as I would call it) in this image on your calibrated display I think that should be the question to focus on. I can see it, but it would be easy to miss from a quick glance.
Logged

ChasP505
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 114



« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2010, 04:16:03 PM »
ReplyReply

The image looks great on my own 2209WA at 125cd/m2.
Logged

Chas P.
Aristoc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199


« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2010, 09:45:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I can see the highlight around the flower on my cal'd monitor but as you say it is very very subtle and easy to miss. On my office monitors, which are not cal'd and have brightess /contrast settings way up, I can see the highlight detail around the flower quite easily. It is actually the fault of my not masking around the flower well enough. I would not have picked this up on my home computer. but saved as a jpeg for web, and uploaded to the internet, the defect bacame visible to stragers. How can this be avoided. ?
Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2010, 10:06:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Unfortunately it's not really possible to control how the image will appear to others, on their own displays. This is true regardless of how you edit your images, and regardless of what equipment (display, etc.) you use or how it's calibrated. The root of the issue is that you have no control over the software & equipment used by others to view your images.
Logged

Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1312


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 17, 2010, 10:37:08 AM »
ReplyReply

How can this be avoided. ?

Ah, you didn't say you were masking. Anytime I'm doing masking I like to do several things to make sure I haven't missed anything.

1) Look at the mask channel with the other channels visibility turned off.
2) apply a radical curve to the image using the mask to exaggerate any problems that might be hard to see.
3) zoom in and inspect edges.

Hope this helps!
Logged

Daniel Browning
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2010, 11:57:22 AM »
ReplyReply

The root of the issue is that you have no control over the software & equipment used by others to view your images.

Reminds me of the story of the repairman who fixed someone's old tube television and noticed that the settings were off so badly that over half of the image was getting cropped from all four sides. He set it back to normal it was possible to see the whole image (except the overscan area), and they picked up their TV. When they first used their newly fixed TV, they were very angry that the he had shrunk the size of the news anchor's face and demanded the repairman put the image back to "normal".
Logged

--Daniel
nkpoulsen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2010, 01:17:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Unfortunately it's not really possible to control how the image will appear to others, on their own displays. This is true regardless of how you edit your images, and regardless of what equipment (display, etc.) you use or how it's calibrated. The root of the issue is that you have no control over the software & equipment used by others to view your images.

I think that there's quite a bit of control, because standard calibrators/profilers are based on the same ICC international standard.  That's assuming that the viewing software is ICC aware.  If there's a limitation of equipment, it would be the gamut of which the monitor is capable.
Logged
Daniel Browning
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2010, 01:40:02 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that there's quite a bit of control, because standard calibrators/profilers are based on the same ICC international standard. 

I disagree. First, even if the software is profile aware, the user's display device will display the profiled color very differently. For example, certain colors in sRGB converted for display on "wide gamut" monitors will have different color because the 8-bit JPEG sent over the the 8-bit wire to the display don't provide enough resolution to convert to Adobe. In the reverse direction you get an even worse problem: converting AdobeRGB colors that are out-of-gamut in sRGB. Of course, if you use anything but sRGB then non-profile-aware software (which is still the majority of the Internet) will butcher it badly.

Second, displays vary hugely in all sorts of parameters throughout their tonal range. Even calibrated and profiled displays can vary significantly (more and more so as you look at cheaper and cheaper price ranges), but display controls left in the hands of users unchecked can mutilate the image. For example, the default brightness on most displays is almost high enough to get a nice tan. Television displays often have the default contrast (clipped whites and blacks) cranked way up, along with saturation and sharpening.
Logged

--Daniel
nkpoulsen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2010, 01:46:13 AM »
ReplyReply

This is just a stab in the dark.  

The I1 Display 2 kit is capable of building large profiles, versus the default matrix-based profiles constructed by the small profile selection.  The latter assumes that a monitor is "well-behaved".  The former is based on a look-up table and is better able to take into account idiosyncrasies of the monitor.  Which one is built by the software is set in the options or preferences.

If your kit has the capability, and if your profile is matrix-based, you might give the large profile a try?  I've compared the two on a LaCie I used to have and saw subtle differences.  Since that time, I use large profiles as a standard.

Logged
pegelli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 609



WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2010, 02:12:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that there's quite a bit of control, because standard calibrators/profilers are based on the same ICC international standard.  That's assuming that the viewing software is ICC aware.  If there's a limitation of equipment, it would be the gamut of which the monitor is capable.

I think what madmanchan means is that you can never be sure the viewer has properly set up his/her equipment. If he has calibrated it and set up properly (and the software is ICC aware) I think what he sees is close to what is intended, however if he hasn't done that all bets are off.
Logged

pieter, aka pegelli
nkpoulsen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2010, 02:50:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I think what madmanchan means is that you can never be sure the viewer has properly set up his/her equipment. If he has calibrated it and set up properly (and the software is ICC aware) I think what he sees is close to what is intended, however if he hasn't done that all bets are off.

Yeah, I was making the assumption that images were being transferred between color managed systems.  I agree, that's not a safe bet.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad