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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> expose for the masses ?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/28/2005 04:28:24 PM · #1
with light on white coming to a close - i'm disturbed

-- i take my same 'submitted' image on various machines and on some
the white is 'too much' and blown out looking
on the image processing machine that i use it looks 'ok'
on yet other machines it looks like dirty laundry

so -- the question is-
do you expose (or correct in postprocessesing ) for the masses ?

or do you do what make you happy on the box infront of you ? (calibrated or not)

or you just expect that some people will say 'Thats not white !!' & give you a 2

02/28/2005 04:33:04 PM · #2
I would cater to the perception of those who care enough to do an image justice. The rest is dross and numbers.
02/28/2005 04:34:07 PM · #3
I just started a thread (Embarassment)where this too comes into play.

My screen an printer are in sync but what I think many dpc'ers are seeing of my submissions in Billboards and Passing Time is just plain nasty.

I want to cover all bases, as that's the pro thing to do.

.....no more Mister Nice Guy!!!

Message edited by author 2005-02-28 16:34:35.
02/28/2005 04:34:11 PM · #4
Well, I usually edit for my (calibrated) monitor. It makes me happy and I can be smug when I get comments about being off.

If you're using PhotoShop, you should be able to set white point in the Levels dialogue box--then, I don't think, it will depend on what your monitor is showing.

Of course, not everyone has a calibrated monitor--so your question is still interesting and valid.
02/28/2005 04:37:29 PM · #5
Use the histogram.
02/28/2005 04:40:27 PM · #6
Originally posted by hsteg:

Use the histogram.


I need to learn more about that. Any tutorials around?
02/28/2005 05:10:58 PM · #7
Originally posted by hsteg:

Use the histogram.


is only helpfull if you presume everyone has the same monitor
& gamma curves setup & are all calibrated

i am looking for a gerneral solution
(which there may be none...)
03/01/2005 03:06:17 PM · #8
Originally posted by pawdrix:

I need to learn more about that. Any tutorials around?


This might be of some help :

Understanding Histograms
03/01/2005 03:32:01 PM · #9
Inasmuch as this relates to the "Light on White" challenge, I have to say after hours and hours of feverish work that this one is gonna be a crapshoot for anyone like me, who's using something other than a pure, blown-out white background. I'm "using" the challenge to try to "render" a textured white, an extremely difficult thing to do, and I've already junked my best picture because I'm morally certain that on most monitors it will look like mud. I've been to several places to check it out, and it's pathetic how much tiny variations in calibration destroy the image. Yet, on my monitor (which is finely calibrated) and in my actual print it looks absolutely wonderful. Lumninous as hell.

When the challenge is posted tonight, I'll take this shot and start a thread with it, see how people react. The one I'm entering is completely different.

Robt.


03/01/2005 04:31:52 PM · #10
Originally posted by ralphnev:

with light on white coming to a close - i'm disturbed

-- i take my same 'submitted' image on various machines and on some
the white is 'too much' and blown out looking
on the image processing machine that i use it looks 'ok'
on yet other machines it looks like dirty laundry

so -- the question is-
do you expose (or correct in postprocessesing ) for the masses ?

or do you do what make you happy on the box infront of you ? (calibrated or not)

or you just expect that some people will say 'Thats not white !!' & give you a 2


MY last challenge with a monitor that was NOT calibrated, I submitted a photograph that on MY NON-calibrated monitor looked good. After voting started the first vote was a 4.0000 [surprised to say the least] I though it would be higher then another 4.0000 so I went to my sons computer and pulled up my picture. Wow - it looked bad, dark, over saturated, etc, etc. I watched my score go up and up and up till it reached the 5.0+ range. So I would say a lot of voters here, IMO, really look at an image and votes accordingly and I believe are fair and some even take into count that you may have had a calibration problem. Here is my last challenge entry and what it should of looked like. I got a higher score than IMO I deserved thanks to voters that took variables into account.
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/309/thumb/147509.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/309/thumb/147509.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' Entry from non calibrated monitor
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/22970/thumb/148557.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/22970/thumb/148557.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' What I wanted it to look like
03/01/2005 04:48:06 PM · #11
I struggled with this challenge considerably due to the same reasons the OP noted. Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that the image overall is "whitish" enough that the non-white parts kinda aren't important. But I'm going to get docked for it, I know it. I'm anxious to see everyone's outtakes after this challenge to see how they chose the shots they did. It was brutal for me to decide.
03/01/2005 04:51:34 PM · #12
Great shots,,,,,,,,and yes the latter is indeed much better. Now I fully understand what people were referring to.

Ray

Message edited by author 2005-03-01 16:53:54.
03/01/2005 05:00:33 PM · #13
I like the first image. could be my monitor needs calabraiting.
03/01/2005 05:18:11 PM · #14
I know that many members's monitors are not calibrated and whenever an image is rich in either dark or light tones: the voting always suffers. This scares a lot of people but it is something we live with.

Amazing, all the work required to tweak an image and then the effect is lost to many. Basics are basics and monitor calibration should be addressed before one even uploads an image, let alone vote. There are a few threads addressing this. I like it when the subject is invoked over again because this may have the effect to have members think about and maybe even do something about it. Remember, when you do an eye calibration to stand about 6-7 feet back to adjust the gamma.
03/01/2005 05:26:29 PM · #15
Originally posted by SDW65:

Here is my last challenge entry and what it should of looked like. I got a higher score than IMO I deserved thanks to voters that took variables into account.
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/309/thumb/147509.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/309/thumb/147509.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' Entry from non calibrated monitor
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/22970/thumb/148557.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/22970/thumb/148557.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' What I wanted it to look like


Or, possibly, the first wave of voters is those who are "serious" about their photography and love to wade right in with their calibrated monitors and get into the voting. Then everyone else witht heir pure-junk monitors started straggling in, and the picture looked just fine to them, so the scores climbed accordingly? Chilling thought...

Is the best "ribbon technique" to view your work on a junk monitor and make it pop in that venue, intentionally angling for the mass voter instead of the relative few who have well-calibrated equipment?

Sigh...

Robt.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/05/2020 01:15:11 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 12/05/2020 01:15:11 AM EST.