If we plan to display our work at 5000K, it seems consistent to calibrate the monitor to 5000K.
I don't understand the appeal of the SORAA bulbs if they are much warmer than 5000K, particularly when all the Piezography instructional materials recommend strict adherence to 5000K working conditions, 5000K monitor calibration, etc.
I am not sure why but it has been always recommended to calibrate monotor at 6500k if plan to display at 5000. I know when I calibrate at 5000 my images on screen appear to warm. It may be you do 6500 for color work? I don't know. But I do get good match between print and monitor they way I calibrate now.
If you're after real WYSIWYG, the monitor and display lights should be as close to the same as you can get them. That is, same color temperature, same frequency plot, same intensity (that one is important if you're worried about nailing shadow and highlight detail). I used to calibrate my monitor to it's D50 setting (I doubt it actually met the D50 standard, but still...) and used the Solux 4700K bulbs on my "proofing wall", and it was good enough that I was able to really cut down my number of test prints. Which I thought was a good result. Clearly, YMMV. Jon Cone used to push the idea of using a purpose made print viewing booth right next to your monitor with both matching very closely. An expensive way to go, but he was/is a professional print maker. What to me would be a luxury guys like him would find to be a necessity I imagine.Originally Posted by Steven Ruttenberg
Bruce Watson
Pardon the messy desk, I was too excited to tidy it up
I put a Phillips 5000K LED light bulb it in a cheap desk lamp and placed it at a distance from the print so that the monitor white brightness and paper white brightness match on my light meter.
Print on the left, EIZO monitor on the right.
Excellent advice and support from CHROMiX. Highly recommended !
That's great, Ken!
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Congratulation Ken! (You're already great at printing even without this)
I've been using these for lighting first at my gallery and now at home:
https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B0774VW5...07BRBG96G?th=1
Bought these for the retail area at my business to make the things we sell look good. Removing the ballasts and adding these made things twice as bright. The high CRI doesn't make the comparitively cool color unpleasant at all since all colors look good under high CRI lighting. I liked them and converted our workshop and office area to them as well.
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/...?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Excellent - Thanks !
I do a lot of black and white and colour work and I find that I get good representation from monitor to print. I take files from hundreds of clients a year and rarely are we off. What this tells me that the state of digital capture and programs like PS , Light Room, and Capture One to name the few I work with are well worth the money and that of my clients.
I took extensive courses with Dan Margulis and today am still a big fan of LAB number system which matches my experiences as a colour corrector on enlarger systems. For me the monitor is not as important as the first print, one needs to see it sometime , and I find that today even Iphone capture is well corrected.
I grew up with the filters and bringing suspect colour negs into final colour balance, I actually got paid really well to do this but now it seems all files are in 95% range of excellent colour , density and contrast. All that is needed is to apply the right paper profile make sure all the workflow details are in order and make the test, then and only then will I start making any corrections if needed. Obviously if I am getting files from my scanners this is not true and a lot of work is required to make the file the way I want, but generally the balances from different sources are good.
I bought a Lacie 26 back when they were new and really liked it ,( I still use it on one station) I had to look to see which monitor I am working on right now (Mac) and I feel they are pretty good. I do not use RGB numbers but am always reading the LAB numbers on all files and from those numbers I can determine if my density is going to lay down on paper at both ends and of course I am always curious of the makeup of colour within the scene and am always testing myself by calling out the A & B before I look at the info Palette.
One day I will find the need for a complete new Mac system and Eizo monitor which I hear is pretty shit hot, but not today.
By the way I have a setup where I take prints into different lighting setups to see how they hold up and I am always aware that most galleries are using warm lights in their spaces, so having just one lighting scenario does not work for me.
Looks good. Messy desk and all!
Pardon the messy desk, I was too excited to tidy it up
I put a Phillips 5000K LED light bulb it in a cheap desk lamp and placed it at a distance from the print so that the monitor white brightness and paper white brightness match on my light meter.
Print on the left, EIZO monitor on the right.
Excellent advice and support from CHROMiX. Highly recommended !
My house/office is pre-wired for track lighting. I need to find a set of fixtures that I will have an excellent throw with diffuse lighting and eveness, even if I need to overlap some of the lights for bigger prints. Any thoughts? Solux seems good, but rather expensive and not good communication skills.
Also, looking for a light I can clip on to an easel that can cover 16x20 with color correct lighting and doesn't look like it came from Walmart. Solux has this https://www.solux.net/cgi-bin/tlistore/clampon.html , but wondering if there is something better.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks