Brightness/ Contrast/ Colour Targets

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Nikon

06/13/2002 10:45:17 AM · #1

I know this has been mentioned before, but the comments on the B&W challenges really seem to bring this home. A lot of people seem to
need to calibrate their monitors before trying to comment on pictures!

The fundamental problem is that the correct calibration for picture
viewing very often is not the correct calibration for working and
doing things like word processing etc.

I see comments that say 'too dark' and comments that say 'too bright' I get 'too contrasty' and 'not enough contrast' I even get a wide range
of comments about the very subtle green tint in my picture (which if the
monitor is badly calibrated can look very green)

I think we need to acquire/ purloin/ create some brightness/ contrast charts and also a qiuck tutorial on gamma correction to help people
set up correctly. I also think the brightness/ contrast target should
appear on every single page that people might be using to vote just
to make sure it gets seen.

FranziskaLang

Nikon D100

06/13/2002 10:48:18 AM · #2

That sounds like a really good idea, Gordon.

Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
I know this has been mentioned before, but the comments on the B&W challenges really seem to bring this home. A lot of people seem to
need to calibrate their monitors before trying to comment on pictures!

The fundamental problem is that the correct calibration for picture
viewing very often is not the correct calibration for working and
doing things like word processing etc.

I see comments that say 'too dark' and comments that say 'too bright' I get 'too contrasty' and 'not enough contrast' I even get a wide range
of comments about the very subtle green tint in my picture (which if the
monitor is badly calibrated can look very green)

I think we need to acquire/ purloin/ create some brightness/ contrast charts and also a qiuck tutorial on gamma correction to help people
set up correctly. I also think the brightness/ contrast target should
appear on every single page that people might be using to vote just
to make sure it gets seen.

manyk

Canon PowerShot A40

06/13/2002 11:24:33 AM · #3

I also agree that a target should be posted on every page!

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

06/13/2002 11:31:30 AM · #4

I would love to see a good tutorial on this myself... I know very little about it. When I do see a photo that is too dark or too bright, I take this into account and play with my monitor controls to see if I can correct it with my monitor before I make a comment on it...

brumos

Canon PowerShot S30

06/13/2002 11:55:09 AM · #5

I absolutely agree! I think the problem is due to the fact that most people (unless you do desktop publishing and web design) don't understand or know that monitors need calibrating. Monitors which have been left "On" for years (eg. the monitor i use at work) tend to flatten colours quite drastically because it's so old. No amount of calibrating can fix it! Also Macs display information with a gamma (or contrast) of 1.8 and PCs at 2.2. The higher the gamma number the darker the screen.

Here are a few links on monitor calibration:

//www.lenswork.com/calibrate.htm
//epaperpress.com/monitorcal/

06/13/2002 11:55:36 AM · #6

This may help a little.
Calibration

* This message has been edited by the author on 6/13/2002 11:58:58 AM.

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

06/13/2002 12:00:29 PM · #7

Also, I'm considering buying this for work. Have any of you heard of anything better? I know that Pantone now has the Spyder as well.

OptiCal

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

06/13/2002 12:16:13 PM · #8

Originally posted by KDJohnson:
This may help a little.
Calibration

I can see all of the individual blocks on that page... however, i'm on a laptop at work and the laptop display is definitely not a good place to look at photos.. :)

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

06/13/2002 12:20:42 PM · #9

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I can see all of the individual blocks on that page... however, i'm on a laptop at work and the laptop display is definitely not a good place to look at photos.. :)

Calibration is a complex thing - that's why there are several companies
selling spyders to measure it correctly. Also, the monitor is only one
part of the equation - the room lighting also plays a big part in how
a picture looks on a screen (or a print for that matter)

That's why neutral colour lights cost so much and why most office or
home environments don't have carefully controlled lighting.

what people think of as white is just one of several quite different
colours that can be considered white - have a look in home depot in
the paint isle if you want an example of this - or think about the
various white balance settings for film and digital cameras.

That black to white scale is good to establish the correct
brightness/ contrast settings but does nothing to help with the colour
settings/ colour temperature/ gamma correction (total or per channel)
and incident light, which all can quite dramatically change how a picture
looks

hokie

Nikon D2X

06/13/2002 12:29:17 PM · #10

I agree, we need a header on the front page to tell folks to calibrate and give them something like that gradient chart and maybe a color chart etc.

At the very least that would give us all (contributors, viewers, voters ) a baseline for viewing and submitting.

DP Review demands that this be done if you are to take any of their photo comaprisons with a grain of salt.

The web is designed for TEXT viewing, not images so most of what looks fine for web surfing works horrible for games and images.

magnetic9999

Canon EOS-20D

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

06/13/2002 01:01:15 PM · #11

this is an issue that has been raised before. i think it's a good idea, if for no other reason than that it will help a lot of people have a better feel for the baseline.

06/13/2002 02:07:20 PM · #12

what about this?

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

06/13/2002 02:14:50 PM · #13

Originally posted by KDJohnson:
what about this?

The problem is that this is still a subjective result. The only real
way to get a good calibration is with a monitor spyder that actually
checks the output analytically and adjusts the gamma values in the
graphics adaptor accordingly.

Though that kind of subjective adjustment is a whole lot better than just adjusting the monitor so that it is comfortable for web viewing/email/word processing and then hoping that pictures will
look the same across multiple machines.

magnetic9999

Canon EOS-20D

06/13/2002 02:24:07 PM · #14

i think it's waaaaay better than nothing.

i say this as someone who's not received criticism here on the lightness/darkness of any my pictures. So it must work reasonably well : )

Reuben

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

06/13/2002 02:26:34 PM · #15

Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:

The problem is that this is still a subjective result. The only real
way to get a good calibration is with a monitor spyder that actually
checks the output analytically and adjusts the gamma values in the
graphics adaptor accordingly.

I don't think we're going to get away with telling the voters to please purchase a 300 dollar piece of hardware before voting.

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

06/13/2002 02:36:34 PM · #16

The nice thing about being a graphic designer is that I need one of those anyway (monitor spyder) for the work I do. So the company pays the bill.

But the other link I had was for software that would be on a website's server, isn't it? Since I know very little about the web, I'm not sure. The viewer doesn't buy anything...if that's the way I understood it. I'd be willing to send a little money Drew and Langdon's way for that. Should I say that? :)

sheyingshi88

06/13/2002 02:38:57 PM · #17

The site DPReview <//www.dpreview.com/> has a block with monitor checking/calabration data on the bottom of the summary before each camera review is started. I think it's a good idea as long as you don't penalize those people with a dial-up connection too much.

magnetic9999

Canon EOS-20D

06/13/2002 03:38:16 PM · #18

again, I dont think it's necessary.

I've never received a criticism on that so I can maybe safely assume I'm in the ballpark.

And that's all any of us really need to be, for these porpoises.

Originally posted by Reuben:
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
[i]
The problem is that this is still a subjective result. The only real
way to get a good calibration is with a monitor spyder that actually
checks the output analytically and adjusts the gamma values in the
graphics adaptor accordingly.

I don't think we're going to get away with telling the voters to please purchase a 300 dollar piece of hardware before voting.

[/i]

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

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

06/13/2002 04:01:10 PM · #19

Originally posted by KDJohnson:
This may help a little.
Calibration

Thanks -- I could see all the steps.

That 16-step gray scale is 64kb saved as a .bmp -- should be smaller as GIF or JPEG. Is it too much bandwidth hit to put one on the top or bottom of each voting page (where the voting numbes are)? It could be scaled smaller and still be useful.

Also, how about making the page background of the voting page a neutral gray?

Remie

Nikon D70

06/13/2002 04:10:16 PM · #20

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Also, how about making the page background of the voting page a neutral gray?

I agree! The backgroundcolor of the page has a major impact on the photos.

06/13/2002 04:19:02 PM · #21

I agree with having the gray background too.

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

06/13/2002 04:35:57 PM · #22

Originally posted by Remie:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
[i]
Also, how about making the page background of the voting page a neutral gray?

I agree! The backgroundcolor of the page has a major impact on the photos.[/i]

Probably a better idea would be to allow the user to select a background colour when they submit the image. Maybe just white/ black or grey but at least have some control over it.

It makes a big difference to how a picture looks.

Remie

Nikon D70

06/13/2002 04:48:48 PM · #23

Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
Originally posted by Remie:
[i]Originally posted by GeneralE:
[i]
Also, how about making the page background of the voting page a neutral gray?

I agree! The backgroundcolor of the page has a major impact on the photos.[/i]

Probably a better idea would be to allow the user to select a background colour when they submit the image. Maybe just white/ black or grey but at least have some control over it.

It makes a big difference to how a picture looks.[/i]

If you mean the submitter is the one who can choose the background then I totally agree with that Gordon.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

06/13/2002 04:52:45 PM · #24

Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
Probably a better idea would be to allow the user to select a background colour when they submit the image. Maybe just white/ black or grey but at least have some control over it.

It makes a big difference to how a picture looks.

Although, this comes close to "using a border." Of course I myself would love those choices (maybe two grays) but if we're all going to use the same background I think the light gray is the standard.