Options
Monitor Calibration = Pointless?
SimplyShane
Registered Users Posts: 153 Major grins
Alright, before anything else::
Monitor calibration IS FAR FROM POINTLESS IF YOU OWN A PRINTER.
However, for people like me who do not, is calibrating your monitor pointless?
The reason I say this, is because online viewers all have WILDLY different screens, both calibrated and uncalibrated. What I'm trying to say is that photos will never look the same on any one screen, so why calibrate?
Again, if you print, then this is a no-brainer. You should calibrate. But if you don't... I'm not seeing the point.
Could someone hip me to the truth?? (:help)
Monitor calibration IS FAR FROM POINTLESS IF YOU OWN A PRINTER.
However, for people like me who do not, is calibrating your monitor pointless?
The reason I say this, is because online viewers all have WILDLY different screens, both calibrated and uncalibrated. What I'm trying to say is that photos will never look the same on any one screen, so why calibrate?
Again, if you print, then this is a no-brainer. You should calibrate. But if you don't... I'm not seeing the point.
Could someone hip me to the truth?? (:help)
0
Comments
you post photos here or anywhere else for people to see
you print your photos ANYWHERE (not just at home)
you want your work to look its best
really? it's easy to spot the way out of wack monitors when folks post here.
Dig this: if you are working and processing photos. You'd be better off to have a calibrated monitor.
Yes, wildly differing cal's out here on the Internet.
But you! If you work with photo processing: PS, LR, and others and want to know your stuff is as close to correct as possible: Calibrate!
You're right, we can't change the fact that most people have uncalibrated screens that look different. So if you don't calibrate, it will look wrong on most screens, but it was going to look wrong on most screens anyway. I see your point.
But here's the problem. If you didn't calibrate, then your images could look wrong on any corrected monitor too. That means they may look wrong if you send them to a print lab, if you try to make a photo book out of them, if you send them to a discerning viewer who has a calibrated monitor, because you want to sell them prints, impress them, hang in their gallery, win their contest, etc.
Furthermore, it means that as technology improves and all devices get better (calibrated from the factory, easier to calibrate, or self-calibrated), your whole library of images will all look a little bit off (got time to fix them all?), while the whole library of someone who calibrates will look on target right away.
.
.
Calibration is important.
HOWEVER, right now, I do not have enough cash to afford a hardware calibrator.
What would you suggest I do? Are there any cheap (under $100) solutions out there? If I absolutely can't get a hardware calibrator, is there a place I can go online to do it --accurately-- by eye?
Where is my next step here? Oh, and before I close, please have a look at my deviantart webpage. I am sure you will find there is quite a lot of crappy looking shots due to this very issue. But let me know your thoughts anyway::
http://simplyshane.deviantart.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bengford
You've got some nice looking work on your deviant art site, Shane. And as others have said, calibration can only help in the long run.
For a cheap alternative to buying, take a look at Borrow Lenses. Last I knew you could also rent calibration tools from them for about $20 for a week.
SmugMug QA
My Photos
Your Deviant Stuff is not crap at all, it is very nice art...Whispers is my fav!
A color calibration hardware/software tool is easier and (potentially) much more accurate, but the above will get you close.
The best method of all is to "print by the numbers", sampling the actual numeric color values of image white, black, neutral and flesh tones for color accuracy and color purity, and then calibrating your print corrections to match.
I use the PictoColor iCorrect Portrait Photoshop plugin to assist in correct white and black and skin tone correction prior to printing. This can get me very close to acceptable values very quickly, and then some tweaking to polish the results.
Including a color target and white target in the image acquisition can also speed up the initial process of white balance and basic color balance in RAW files conversion.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000NRODT4/?tag=hashemian-20
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/
Can you share with us your monitor mfg and model? exact number?
Just want to check what color space your unit supports and this may help to pinpoint what used hardware you can pick up and use.
.
.
Dell. 19 inch Widescreen. Model:: SE198WFP.
Beyond that, I'm not sure....Thanks for the help so far guys. I appreciate your generosity.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bengford
This monitor uses a 6bit TN TFT LCD panel.
I'm pretty much 100% certain that the color space it covers does not extend beyond the sRGB space.
Therefore an old Spyder2 Pro or Spyder2Express would work well with this monitor as it is NOT a wide gamut monitor. You can find these Spyder2 units in some areas on Craigslist for cheap as many users have moved up to the Spyder3 or i1 display2 units as their pucks can be used on wide gamut monitors.
.
.
Am I right in saying that a heavy majority of all monitors are 6bit TN panels??
I wish I could spend 300 on a better IPS monitor... But I thought lens glass was more important..
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bengford
The majority of LCD monitors are indeed using TN panels. They're inexpensive and great for gaming and general web browsing and document work. People buy them because they're trying to save money and know not what they buy.
Here's a site that lists most current IPS type monitors.
http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php
That Dell 2209WA can often be found on sale for $220 USD or less (it is currently $229 in Canada and a "special" $209 CAD deal is pending in a week or two).
The new HP ZR22w has an MSRP of $289.
Your current monitor is functional but if you start using post processing tools like Adobe CS3/4/5 and Adobe Lightroom.... well, you have there about $1200 or so of software that your current monitor will not be able to do full justice for, even when calibrated. At some point as you try to refine your image work you're going to have to consider the monitor side of the equation as you will not be able to perceive the full character of the more $$$ lens you acquire.
Also, when you spend as much time as I do in front of a PC monitor (up to 12-14 hours a day) it is easier on the eyes to have a better quality monitor.
.
.