March 06, 2015, 09:37:12 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - tolusina

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 37
1
....You can use soft-proofing in LR5 to estimate colour loss...
I like the way you put it there, I'd add that color loss is estimated rather accurately.

No it isn't, Lightroom soft proofing does a very inaccurate job of any decent printers true gamut potential. Try it, make two prints one that you have 'adjusted' for what LR says is in gamut, and send one straight to the printer, the one that went straight to the printer will be much more saturated and closer to your original image on screen.

Rendering intent is very important, but soft proofing as done in LR, is not.
whatever, sheesh

We have zero respect for each other, that is fine, but the difference is I back up everything I say.

This guy is a world authority on colour management and his findings align with my empirical results.

http://digitaldog.net/files/LR4_softproof2.mov
A useful video for sure, as long as you're using LR beta 4. I stopped watching the irrelevant dated material at 0:08.
And, no, you're not going to goad me into wasting ink, paper and time printing without soft proofing but you go right ahead.

In my experience, when I print after editing with a calibrated wide gamut monitor and soft proofing with an appropriate .icc profile created expressly for and with the printer, ink and paper to be used and no other adjustments, my prints come out exactly as I expect the first and every time, zero waste of time, paper and ink.
---
I don't know, what? Maybe you're bringing complex baggage from a past technological era.
It's just not as complicated as you insist, it's just spendy on gear.
---
Once more, these are the steps;
1) Calibrate the monitor, don't try and second guess that your visual judgement is better than the hardware and software and tweak it further.
2) Profile the printer, ink and paper to be used, soft proof with the resulting .icc/.icm profile.
3) Click print, frame and hang the output.
---


2
....You can use soft-proofing in LR5 to estimate colour loss...
I like the way you put it there, I'd add that color loss is estimated rather accurately.

No it isn't, Lightroom soft proofing does a very inaccurate job of any decent printers true gamut potential. Try it, make two prints one that you have 'adjusted' for what LR says is in gamut, and send one straight to the printer, the one that went straight to the printer will be much more saturated and closer to your original image on screen.

Rendering intent is very important, but soft proofing as done in LR, is not.
whatever, sheesh

3

If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.

I'm a bit confused by this statement. In what context (desktop, web-browsing, photo-editing, videos,etc.)? And are you just talking intense bright saturation or like even whites popping your eyes out because the monitor's backlight is set so high?

I'm not quite sure what you describe is necessarily how it should always be.

And I rest my case................
No, you're just obfuscating the discussion. If you don't care for the discussion, stay out of it.

4

If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.

I'm a bit confused by this statement. In what context (desktop, web-browsing, photo-editing, videos,etc.)? And are you just talking intense bright saturation or like even whites popping your eyes out because the monitor's backlight is set so high?

I'm not quite sure what you describe is necessarily how it should always be.
Whites aren't an issue, some bright reds and greens are though.
Re; "...how it should always be..." I probably could have phrased LEAVE IT THAT WAY better, more like use it that way while photo editing.
I have no idea if or what might be related to the monitor's back lighting.
 
I do know that I've been amazed, gratified and quite satisfied with each and every print I've gotten following this procedure. I've had zero wasted prints. A far cry from guesswork fails I've had in the past with less and lesser hardware and software.

5
If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.
Are you using a wide gamut monitor in AdobeRGB mode?  If so, some manufacturers offer tools to automatically switch back to sRGB for browsing and other tasks.  Dell's tool that I use works great, which makes web pages go from NEON back to normal...
Yes.
It's an NEC PA242W with Spectraview.
I have seen where/how to switch back but I've not seen an automatic switching choice.

6
....You can use soft-proofing in LR5 to estimate colour loss...
I like the way you put it there, I'd add that color loss is estimated rather accurately.

7
Let me offer an analogy to audio, one that you may be easily able to reproduce on your own.
What is pleasing in audio is subjective as are visuals.
 
If your PC's sound hardware has a graphic equalizer, open it.
Next open a media player with it's own equalizer leaving the software's equalizer off, play a song while tweaking the hardware's equalizer to your taste.
Now, with the hardware equalizer still active and tweaked, tweak some more with the software's equalizer.
I've found there's about nothing I can do to get pleasing results with both equalizers running on top of each other.
 - - -
Back to color management for printing.
 Calibrate your monitor. Best to use something like the x-rite i1Display Pro that takes ambient light into consideration.
Run the calibration in a darkened room on a well warmed up monitor that's been on at least two hours.
If your monitor has it's own hardware LUTs, use that.
If no hardware LUT, use the calibration software's monitor adjustment.

 
If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.
Any other adjustments made through the OS will result in the equivalent of using multiple equalizers on audio signals.
Now, when the PC hardware and software send a red signal to the monitor, the monitor will display the truest red it is capable of and the same for all colors, white point, black point.
- - -

 
Printer can't print the same though, it needs profiling for each and every printer/ink/paper combination to be used.
A device and software such as a Datacolor SpyderPRINT is used to profile.
Profiling software sends a print job to the printer of many many different colored squares, software knows exactly what colors were sent to print.
Profiling hardware is then used to read to the profiling hardware exactly what the printer actually did print for each color, software then creates a difference or error file which is an .icc or .icm file. Name this file distinctly and descriptively.
- - -
Now in your photo editing software, edit using soft proofing or print proofing with the appropriate .icc/.icm file. If your editor has no such option, get one that does.
DO NOT ADD IN THE PRINTER'S DRIVER SOFTWARE, if you do, you're back to the multiple equalizer analogy. Print directly from the photo editor's print function.
- - -
Short version......
Calibrated monitor displays the truest color it is capable of.
Printer profile in photo editor displays what printer can and will do.
Any other tweaks result analogous to multiple equalizers.

- - -
With end to end color management in mind I spent many hours over several months reading most everything I could find, much of what I found left me more confused than when I started.
The best reading on the topic I found was at Keith Cooper's most excellent Northlight Images site, specifically starting from this page......
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/what_is_colour.html
Keith has written so extensively on this and so many other topics I wonder how he finds time to shoot.
Shoot he does and very well, up on a level I aspire to.

Clearly.

I have edited your post for clarity, relevance, and useful information.

The best reading on the topic I found was at Keith Cooper's most excellent Northlight Images site, specifically starting from this page......
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/what_is_colour.html

Trying to start up again? You like it that way? The rest of the community doesn't.

8
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: March 05, 2015, 02:22:09 PM »
It's not much like but instantly brought "Moonrise Over Hernandez" to mind.
Sorry I can't compliment you any better than that.....

No worries. :D
Are you familiar with M. O. H.?

9
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: March 05, 2015, 01:22:20 PM »
Mid storm near my house.

image.jpg
It's not much like but instantly brought "Moonrise Over Hernandez" to mind.
Sorry I can't compliment you any better than that.....

10
 Let me offer an analogy to audio, one that you may be easily able to reproduce on your own.
What is pleasing in audio is subjective as are visuals.
 
If your PC's sound hardware has a graphic equalizer, open it.
Next open a media player with it's own equalizer leaving the software's equalizer off, play a song while tweaking the hardware's equalizer to your taste.
Now, with the hardware equalizer still active and tweaked, tweak some more with the software's equalizer.
I've found there's about nothing I can do to get pleasing results with both equalizers running on top of each other.
 - - -
Back to color management for printing.
 Calibrate your monitor. Best to use something like the x-rite i1Display Pro that takes ambient light into consideration.
Run the calibration in a darkened room on a well warmed up monitor that's been on at least two hours.
If your monitor has it's own hardware LUTs, use that.
If no hardware LUT, use the calibration software's monitor adjustment.

 
If your results come out like mine did, colors will be very bright and vivid to the point it almost hurts to look at the brightest and most vivid. LEAVE IT THAT WAY.
Any other adjustments made through the OS will result in the equivalent of using multiple equalizers on audio signals.
Now, when the PC hardware and software send a red signal to the monitor, the monitor will display the truest red it is capable of and the same for all colors, white point, black point.
- - -

 
Printer can't print the same though, it needs profiling for each and every printer/ink/paper combination to be used.
A device and software such as a Datacolor SpyderPRINT is used to profile.
Profiling software sends a print job to the printer of many many different colored squares, software knows exactly what colors were sent to print.
Profiling hardware is then used to read to the profiling hardware exactly what the printer actually did print for each color, software then creates a difference or error file which is an .icc or .icm file. Name this file distinctly and descriptively.
- - -
Now in your photo editing software, edit using soft proofing or print proofing with the appropriate .icc/.icm file. If your editor has no such option, get one that does.
DO NOT ADD IN THE PRINTER'S DRIVER SOFTWARE, if you do, you're back to the multiple equalizer analogy. Print directly from the photo editor's print function.
- - -
Short version......
Calibrated monitor displays the truest color it is capable of.
Printer profile in photo editor displays what printer can and will do.
Any other tweaks result analogous to multiple equalizers.
- - -
With end to end color management in mind I spent many hours over several months reading most everything I could find, much of what I found left me more confused than when I started.
The best reading on the topic I found was at Keith Cooper's most excellent Northlight Images site, specifically starting from this page......
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/what_is_colour.html
Keith has written so extensively on this and so many other topics I wonder how he finds time to shoot.
Shoot he does and very well, up on a level I aspire to.

 

11
Lenses / Re: Manual macro lenses for intraoral photographs
« on: March 05, 2015, 10:35:15 AM »
No idea if this can actually work, here goes anyway because I'd sure try if I had the need that you have.
Photograph your passport, color correct it to itself for whatever lighting was used for that shot, crop out all framing and borders, resize it down to something like postage stamp size, print and apply it to a dental mirror sized tool.

12
Lighting / Re: Underwater Canon 600EX-RT Photography
« on: March 05, 2015, 12:22:22 AM »
Skim this article........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_with_submarines
Note the very low radio frequencies needed in water (especially salt water) environments and why.
Then consider that the Canon RT system operates at frequencies between 2405 MHz to 2475 MHz (2.405 GHz to 2.475 GHz).
I'd expect very limited radio range underwater, sure would love to hear your or someone's actual experiences, an interesting topic.

14
.....You still have photography shops?....
There are still 3 or 4 in the Detroit area, more farther out in Port Huron, near Flint, Lansing.
I've only been to a few, one I'd rate excellent, one very poor.
ProCam in Livonia matched B&H bundle prices while I got to play in store prior to purchase. They've lens rentals,  a rather large on site studio with multiple sets, a variety of backgrounds and lighting, seems to me they "GET IT" in a big way.
They used to advertise here, I couldn't get much more than a stammer in reply to my 'why no longer' query.

15
...Funny, the first few times in a camera shop I felt the same way.....
Only the first few times?
I still get that too often even when walking in with an "L" bracketed 6D over my shoulder.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 37