DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Texture - highly monitor dependent
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/18/2004 05:27:47 PM · #1
My submission is sitting at 5.1, ...and I figured it would rival my best to-date (7.39);(. While at work today, I took a look at my entry from my Dell laptop. What a difference from what I see on my home PC!!

Consider this...

My laptop is a 15-inch LCD monitor. My home PC has a hi-resolution 17-inch monitor, set at 32-bit color. Both are 1024 X 768. The non-LCD monitor is clear, crisp, and displays the texture exactly as I intended. The laptop depends on the angle of view, but is generally MUCH less appealing.

I also noticed that, if you go for lots of texture (i.e., variation in tonality; plus good contrast), the file size is larger for a 640 X 420 (or so..) image. Thus , in order to stay within the 150kb limit, I need to increase the jpeg compression, with a corresponding decrease in quality.

Maybe this accounts for the lower score?? (Of course, it could just be a bad picture, but I'm not throwing in the towel just yet. ;-))

-len
 02/18/2004 05:34:10 PM · #2
I had the same issue on my textures challenge... I used the unsharp filter which evidently make the file larger...so I had to shrink to 403 x 309 pixles to get down to the 150K limit. The quality of the shot definitely suffered. Any suggestions on how to avoid this issue?
 02/18/2004 05:36:54 PM · #3
I use a 15inch Sharp LCD with 32-bit colour and find it gives me a much better image when compared to my previous CRT monitor. I have mine clamped on an ajustable arm so I can adjust angle etc. But i understand what you are saying and its been discussed on the forums here many a time. Do a search of the threads.


02/19/2004 07:29:25 AM · #4
I have a basic question about monitors: I find myself giving a lot of comments that say something about focus improvement (and that usually means soft to my eye) and I have gotten a few comments about "post processing artifacts" which I think means that I had coeeficients too high on the unsharp mask filter.

Could my LCD monitor be "soft" which is forcing me to overprocess and to look at photos which are really in focus and appear soft?

Thanks
Bill
 02/19/2004 07:58:11 AM · #5
Originally posted by bill_hk2002:
I have a basic question about monitors: I find myself giving a lot of comments that say something about focus improvement (and that usually means soft to my eye) and I have gotten a few comments about "post processing artifacts" which I think means that I had coeeficients too high on the unsharp mask filter.

Could my LCD monitor be "soft" which is forcing me to overprocess and to look at photos which are really in focus and appear soft?

Thanks
Bill


Unless you have a fairly new LCD panel, the contrast will be much lower than a typical CRT. If you do a lot of non-print imaging, you'll want an LCD with a contrast ratio of at least 500:1, though 700:1 is becoming common these days. If you do print work, you're either going to have to spend thousands of dollars on LCD or Plasma, or just stick to a high-end CRT. Even with high contrast ratios, LCD can't match CRT for colour accuracy. So the short answer is yes, your LCD panel could be causing you to overprocess images.
 02/19/2004 10:50:43 AM · #6
I think the important thing is to use one monitor for all your voting so that it's consistant. I have time at work to vote, but my monitor there stinks and it wouldn't be fair to those photos to base my vote on what I see there.


02/19/2004 11:31:46 AM · #7
Originally posted by Dyslexic:
Unless you have a fairly new LCD panel, the contrast will be much lower than a typical CRT. If you do a lot of non-print imaging, you'll want an LCD with a contrast ratio of at least 500:1, though 700:1 is becoming common these days. If you do print work, you're either going to have to spend thousands of dollars on LCD or Plasma, or just stick to a high-end CRT. Even with high contrast ratios, LCD can't match CRT for colour accuracy. So the short answer is yes, your LCD panel could be causing you to overprocess images.


I'd question this. The industry standard, and probably the best LCD money can buy, is Apple's Cinema Display with a contrast ration of 350:1.
 02/19/2004 12:22:30 PM · #8
Originally posted by zeuszen:
The industry standard, and probably the best LCD money can buy...


Ughhhh.... another industry standard :(

I don't have that industry standard software that everybody keeps talking about using to calibrate monitors, so anyone who wants me to vote corrrectly on their Texture entry can just send me a copy of CS. And how about a new CRT monitor to replace my laptop's "TFT active matrix display" ?
 02/19/2004 02:05:35 PM · #9
Originally posted by Drake:
I had the same issue on my textures challenge... I used the unsharp filter which evidently make the file larger...so I had to shrink to 403 x 309 pixles to get down to the 150K limit. The quality of the shot definitely suffered. Any suggestions on how to avoid this issue?


If you use photoshop, which I'm assuming you do since you used the unsharp mask, you are able to lower the over all quality when saving the photo. You can do that and leave the photo at 640x???. Or you can do a file... save for web... then choose format as .jpg and select the file size you'd like... typically for me about 148k. Hope this helps.

02/19/2004 02:49:19 PM · #10
Originally posted by xcharrier:
If you use photoshop, which I'm assuming you do since you used the unsharp mask


Wrong assumption. Photoshop is not the only program that has unsharp mask.
 02/19/2004 03:07:39 PM · #11
not sure about the differences in monitors - but i dont seem to have any trouble saving a good looking image well under 150K, most of mine are around 50K color - and 20-35K BW, and are almost all 640x427px images

i dont do any sharpening until i resize for display here usually, and use the 'save as for web' function at JPEG high 100%.


02/19/2004 03:28:48 PM · #12
Originally posted by zeuszen:
The industry standard, and probably the best LCD money can buy, is Apple's Cinema Display with a contrast ration of 350:1.

I question that this is the "industry standard", especially since it can only be used on a Macintosh -- and as everybody knows, Apple has a very tiny market share.

The Sharp LL-T2020 is arguably a better display. It can display 64 times as many colors as a conventional LCD panel, and Sharp's 10-bit gamma correction technology can show 10 bits of gray scale per subpixel. Seven types of color adjustments offer all the palette precision necessary for a highly accurate calibration.

"The LL-T2020 is truly the most advanced monitor for professionals who need the best color reproduction available for LCD monitors."

And it works on both Macs and PCs.

Message edited by author 2004-02-19 15:29:56.
 02/19/2004 03:47:55 PM · #13
I would agree that it's a stretch to call it an industry standard, but I use the 23" Apple Cinema display on my WinXP PC with no problem. It's gorgeous, and after calibration, renders my photos beautifully.
 02/19/2004 03:55:00 PM · #14
Originally posted by welcher:
I would agree that it's a stretch to call it an industry standard, but I use the 23" Apple Cinema display on my WinXP PC with no problem. It's gorgeous, and after calibration, renders my photos beautifully.


yeah, just need that little converter and you're all set.. i have quite a few friends who use the apple cinema display on a PC
 02/19/2004 10:30:56 PM · #15
The comments about contrast ratio compelled me to look up mine. I'm using a Sylvania L17 (Sylvania??) at 1200 x 1000 resolution, claimed contrast ratio of 400:1 (minimum). I really like the way it displays photos, and visitors have commented similarly.
I've received comments on my "Black" entry that ranged from "way too dark" to "backdrop too close, can see it's texture..."
It IS too close, but I couldn't see it in my submission. Then I recalibrated gamma according to some suggestions from links posted on the forum, and now I can see the backdrop in the image.
It's apparent to me now that monitor adjustment is critical.
Learning is a wonderful thing...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/03/2025 04:02:04 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/03/2025 04:02:04 PM EDT.