5000, 6500, 9300, WHY would I pick just one?

Sony SAL-50F14 Normal 50mm f/1.4 Autofocus Lens for the Sony

08/02/2007 05:53:01 PM · #1

So, I understand WHAT the color temperature is about, I understand what the gamma is about....what I haven't found is the answer to this question:

If you have the choice to set the monitor color temperature, WHY would one choose 6500 over 9300, or for that matter ANY color temperature? Is it personal preference based on an individual's perception of white? What is the "Standard" if there is such a thing.

I just haven't found something that answers my question as I wrote it.

Thanks!
Paul

ladyhawk22

Sony DSLR-A700

08/02/2007 06:36:40 PM · #2

Huh....I don't think I ever realized you could set color temperature for monitors....weird. If you were asking about lights, I could answer that :-) But I'm not much help here...unless it has to do with the same kinds of principles. Maybe the colors look different if you are viewing the monitor in florescent or natural light? Or halogen?

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

08/02/2007 06:47:25 PM · #3

Hardware doesn't have a perception. It just has 1's an 0's.

It's important in printing, if you're color balance is off, there a good possibility that what you see as warm/cool will be totally different on paper than on your monitor.

Oh, 6500 is in general mostly correct. you need a calibrated monitor to reflect the best possible colors.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

08/02/2007 06:56:13 PM · #4

Well, I guess I'm trying to get at this:

Calibration hardware asks you to set a native monitor temperature. Ok, I can pick from anything. Why would I pick one over the other?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

08/02/2007 08:21:29 PM · #5

I don't think the calibration software is setting your monitor temp -- I think it is asking you to enter the value at which you already have it set using whatever control panel sets display/monitor parameters.

If your monitor is set (for example) to 6500, you have to tell the calibration software that fact so it cam make the proper accommodations.

08/02/2007 08:27:34 PM · #6

I know its not setting the monitor color temp...I'm doing that. But, depending on which I set, the software compensates, but slightly differently, a little warmer, a little cooler.

So, why would I choose to set a cooler monitor temp over a warmer, prior to running calibration?

Originally posted by GeneralE:

08/02/2007 08:34:43 PM · #7

"To get the best results from your monitor, it is important to understand the steps involved. The first is calibration; i.e. setting your monitor to a well defined, standard state. You need to select a color temperature to work with. PC video cards and monitors are usually shipped with a white point set to 9300Â°K. This gives a bluish tint to everything. It is often used for CAD work stations or in video games where maximum color contrast is desired. For photography, however, color accuracy is more important. The next standard color temperature is 5000Â°K (or its close cousin D50). This is the color of lighting in art galleries, and approximates sunlight. On many PC monitors it produces white colors with a dingy, yellowish cast. For some Macs, it is a viable choice. A better choice is often 6500Â°K (or D65). Most monitors reach useful brightness levels much more easily at 6500Â°K/D65 than at 5000Â°K/D50. Also, some monitors display reddish highlights at D50. Play with your monitor settings and decide which looks best.
If you have a LCD screen and your calibration system allows using the native white point, do so. This preserves the maximum possible color range on LCD monitors."

//www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor_calibration.htm

Setting the white point on the monitor has most to do with what "You" think looks best and the amount of ambient light in your work space. I have LCD's and use the native white point. I also tend to work in a dark-ish room.

Message edited by author 2007-08-02 20:35:30.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

08/02/2007 08:49:40 PM · #8

Thank you, this is the information I'm looking for. So, is it safe to say that if I should set the monitor's native temperature to that for which a print will be most viewed in?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

08/02/2007 08:56:23 PM · #9

Originally posted by PGerst:

... I should set the monitor's native temperature to that for which a print will be most viewed in?

That seems right.

Think of it as the opposite of setting White Balance with a card -- the white card will look different under "white" lights of different brightness.

08/02/2007 08:58:22 PM · #10

AH! Got it. So...
5000 = Art Gallery
6500 = Sunlight
7500 = ??
9300 = ??

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by PGerst:
... I should set the monitor's native temperature to that for which a print will be most viewed in?

That seems right.

Think of it as the opposite of setting White Balance with a card -- the white card will look different under "white" lights of different brightness.

08/02/2007 09:02:10 PM · #11

Color is such a complex subject. The reason it is so complex is because it is subjective. There are so many variables that come in to play. The INTERNATIONAL COLOR CONSORTIUM (ICC) is the governing body of the objective color standard. The ICC along with companies like Adobe continue to work to simplify color and the reproduction process.

Here is an Adobe document on Color Work flow. This should answer all your questions.

To answer your last question no. The first part of calibration is very subjective. It's all about how you like it. Monitor profiling and calibration start with what makes your eye happy.

Message edited by author 2007-08-02 21:03:03.

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature

08/02/2007 09:04:04 PM · #12

Originally posted by PGerst:

AH! Got it. So...
5000 = Art Gallery
6500 = Sunlight
7500 = ??
9300 = ??

08/02/2007 09:08:37 PM · #13

Thanks, now I'm embarrased that I didn't go there. :)

08/04/2007 02:32:53 PM · #14

This isn't a bump, I'm just replying to my own question, based on all the help I received and my thoughts on this topic...just to help someone who may read this thread in the future.

1) Prints look different under different light sources. Hold a photo under the sun it looks one way, hold it by a candle, it looks another.

2) What you see from a print is due to a combination of reflectance and scattering of light from the source you are observing.

3) What you see on the monitor is due to the emission of the electron gun (CRT). You can simulate that to "match" a reflective source of light by setting the color temperature. That way, what you see on the screen will match what you see on the print, at least as close as you can. Remember, RGB light makes white, RGB dyes make black.

4) Both you and the print are subject to the same environment, so your perception of what the print looks like is affected by the same source. However, what you see on the screen is a function of the emission source and your perception due to ambient light. So, if one is picky, they should work in a dark room or use a calibration device that measures and adjusts for ambient light. But, generally, this shouldn't matter too much.

Thanks again for the help and direction. If I didn't explain it well or correctly above, please let me know.