photos too bright?

thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
edited September 17, 2009 in Finishing School
if you have a calibrated monitor, could you take a look at this gallery and let me know if the photos are too bright? http://www.jeremyking.com/Portraits/Barb-and-Sam/

I started to process these at first on a calibrated laptop...moved to a calibrated desktop and the photos looked too dark - so I brightened them...now, i'm at another computer and they look too bright...

obviously one of the monitors is off... :scratch

Comments

  • RicherSeaRicherSea Registered Users Posts: 18 Big grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    They don't look too bright to me. Did you calibrate both monitors when they had warmed up fully?
    Andy

    andy@richersea.co.uk
    www.richersea.co.uk
  • adbsgicomadbsgicom Registered Users Posts: 3,615 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    Compared to your other gallery, yes, they are a bunch brighter. Looks like they haven't hit the point of blowing out the highlights (you'd have to look at your historgram for that), but they definately seem too bright for my taste.
    - Andrew

    Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
    My SmugMug Site
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    @RicherSea - yes, both were calibrated after warming up...the laptop is an entry-level laptop, and i've heard that they aren't that reliable when calibrating....hence i moved to the tower to finish processing...

    @adbsgicom - i think so too...is your monitor calibrated? if so, then it looks like i need to recalibrate my monitor (i calibrated 2 weeks ago)...
  • adbsgicomadbsgicom Registered Users Posts: 3,615 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    Yes, it is calibrated. As reference I looked at your other portrait gallery just to get a sense of what brightness you've done. Those seem very on in terms of brightness. I tend to want things maybe a little less than maximally exposed, so that's my main caveat on this. Like I said, I don't think the images are blown out (check your histogram), but they feel a bit too bright.

    Good luck.

    PS, you'll tend to get more feedback if you post a couple samples in the thread.
    - Andrew

    Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
    My SmugMug Site
  • RicherSeaRicherSea Registered Users Posts: 18 Big grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    They certainly are much brighter than your other gallery. When you say too bright do you mean for veiewing on screen or printing?

    Is your calibration tool giving you the option of setting a target white luminosity? I know if i let mine choose one automatically it makes my images far too dark compared to my other monitors and print output.
    Andy

    andy@richersea.co.uk
    www.richersea.co.uk
  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    They are too bright
    It doesn't appear you've blown any highlights, but they are hugely washed out.

    I would suggest you re-process these: dial back the exposure at least a stop (maybe a stop and a half), set your white and black points, and apply a bit of contrast curve. Take a look and maybe add in a bit of saturation.
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    @adbsgicom - yeah, the other gallery, although not perfect, was what i was expecting...the histograms were ok, but probably more overexposed than the shots from the other gallery...but on the screen they looked good so i moved on...
    @RicherSea - yes i can set the target white luminosity...maybe when i recalibrate i need to lower this value...
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    @Scott_Quier - thanks, that's exactly what i was thinking...i was hoping this wasn't the case, but oh well! won't take too long, just hate the idea of "redoing" something.. rolleyes1.gif
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    one last question, don't know if this matters or not...i batched these in PS CS4 and one of the options for the batch is to embed the color profile ICC...i said to NOT embed the color profile...would that have any impact on the resulting brightness i'm seeing?
  • adbsgicomadbsgicom Registered Users Posts: 3,615 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    Are you working in sRGB; if so, then you don't likely need to embed the profile. If you are doing anything else, make sure you convert to sRGB for displaying on the web. I don't know if smugmug respects AdobeRGB or ProPhotoRGB color spaces, even if you do embed them.
    - Andrew

    Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
    My SmugMug Site
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    nope sRGB...i didn't think it would matter in this case, but thought i'd ask...apparently i really do need to redo these... rolleyes1.gif
  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    thaKing wrote:
    one last question, don't know if this matters or not...i batched these in PS CS4 and one of the options for the batch is to embed the color profile ICC...i said to NOT embed the color profile...would that have any impact on the resulting brightness i'm seeing?
    Not embedding the color profile is usually not a problem if you are working in the sRGB colorspace as most applications (printers, video, pro labs) will assume sRGB unless informed other-wise. It's when you work in something other than sRGB that you may have issues. For many browsers, etc, if you view an aRGB (with or without the colorspace information) will result in muddy colors and generally "dark" images. There are notable exceptions, but not many yet. My understanding is that many (all?) print labs will pay attention to the embedded profiles when they print.
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • QarikQarik Registered Users Posts: 4,959 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    uncalibrated monitor..they are not technically blown but they do seem a touch bright for my taste.
    D700, D600
    14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
    85 and 50 1.4
    45 PC and sb910 x2
    http://www.danielkimphotography.com
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    you guys just keep raining on my parade :cry just kidding, i really appreciate the feedback, and it's what i expected...
  • goldilocksandmy3bearsgoldilocksandmy3bears Registered Users Posts: 423 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2009
    Scott_Quier wrote:
    It doesn't appear you've blown any highlights, but they are hugely washed out.

    I would suggest you re-process these: dial back the exposure at least a stop (maybe a stop and a half), set your white and black points, and apply a bit of contrast curve. Take a look and maybe add in a bit of saturation.
    15524779-Ti.gif
    Courtney
  • ivarivar Registered Users Posts: 8,395 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2009
    I've moved this to "Finishing School", since it really has nothing to do with the people, but with processing thumb.gif
    Ivar
    www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,708 moderator
    edited September 16, 2009
    I find these images a bit bright also, but I do not see blown highlights, indeed I find very few pixels near 248, 248, 248 at all.. Even the sky is lower than this in many images. I think the issue is more contrast and image saturation than real over exposure. The white point does not seem that high in these images.

    I suggest always tagging your sRGB files as sRGB. If the files are not tagged, you can never assume how they will be displayed or printed via the web.

    If you NEED aRGB, I assume you know why you specifically need Adobe RGB, and don't need anyone here to explain it.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2009
    @ivar - sorry for the wrong forum... thumb.gif

    @pathfinder - well, i've recalibrated (a couple times actually - each time i kept getting similar calibrations as the first)...now, i'm hoping i can work with the photos with the new calibration...that being said, these are sRGB..when you say "tagged" do you mean the option to embed the color profile when saving...Andy told me not to do that for files that might be printed, hence no profile...

    since i recalibrated, i worked (briefly) on one a photo to see what the results would be...not sure if the calibration worked (why am i having so much difficulties this time, i don't know)...so, here's the photo, how does this look, any better:
    651897044_TDv4j-L.jpg
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,708 moderator
    edited September 16, 2009
    I think this looks much better.

    I am not certain exactly what Andy said. I do know that I do convert my files to sRGB before uploading to smugmug, and each file has the sRGB tag attached.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • thaKingthaKing Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited September 17, 2009
    pathfinder wrote:
    I think this looks much better.

    I am not certain exactly what Andy said. I do know that I do convert my files to sRGB before uploading to smugmug, and each file has the sRGB tag attached.
    well, i went to the thread to link it here for you and Andy has since clarified what he said....so i will resave these with the sRGB profile embedded...
Sign In or Register to comment.