Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 15:48 01-10-00 -0700, you wrote: >Tina Manley wrote: > > >>>>>>>>From some of the comments, I think the differences in monitors >and/or their calibrations must be more than I imagined!<<<<<<< > >Hi Tina, > >An interesting observation about monitors, as I've seen a colour shot of >mine on a half dozen monitors in various locations and hardly any two >are calibrated the same. In publication and repro offices, the monitors are calibrated to the output device. That is the monitor is set to reflect the requirements of the printer, press or film recorder. Making the picture "perfect" on the monitor for the sake of what the photographer thinks is "perfect" is of no matter. While we all use RGB and lab colour, the fact is that most photography "USERS" use CMYK for printing presses. ...and while CMYK can look like crap on a computer monitor, the output device knows exactly what to do with it for best OUTPUT results. I set up my monitors based on a certain gamma for the ambient light in my office and calibrate it for my printer. It is close to any "standard" in the news business but when I send a picture to a client, they are on their own. It is up to them to adjust the picture to their monitor, printer, press gamma and calibration. ... but I have had clients ask me to set up colour setting and calibration to their specs before sending. It looked OK on my system, could have been better but the point was that it would look better on their system without them having to mess with it. By the way, we have a new baby in our kingdom. For those interested... http://www.straylight.ca/erinn_skye ...and she is perfectly colour balanced for the cold North Atlantic light. cheers,