RE: Apple ADC24 uniformity test
RE: Apple ADC24 uniformity test
- Subject: RE: Apple ADC24 uniformity test
- From: Roger <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:42:13 -0500
Bob,
> > "but shall be at least 80 cd/m2 and should be at least 120 cd/m2."
>
> Does it say why?
I spoke with the person who drafted the standard many times. At the time
this was drafted, only CRTs were around. So, 80 cd/m2 was a bare minimum but
some CRTs were capable of higher luminance than 80. So, 80 was a bare
minimum but anything higher than 80 would improve the appearance of contrast
and allow viewing images in brighter environments.
> So it matches the low contrast of prints better?
To match the brightness appearance of prints viewed under the standard 500
Lux condition, a monitor luminance should emit 160 cd/m2 (500 divided by
pi). If images are viewed at lower luminance while the prints are viewed at
500 Lux, in principle, the monitor image should appear dimmer than the
print. Makes sense?
> > Secondly, sadly, 80 cd/m2 falls quite shy of IDEAlliance's 160 cd/m2
> > luminance requirement for monitor certification.
>
> No indication of why in IDEAlliance stuff as far as I can see.
It's derived from the ISO-3664's "P2" standard viewing condition of 500 Lux.
160 = 500 / 3.1415169257...
> Eizo's
> pass the certification, but using them at that level, as I said
> previously, voids the warranty and Eizo's recommendations.
You see, they pass the certification *at 160*. But anyone using them,
officially, at anything under their certified condition can no longer be
said to have a certified setup. Isn't it crazy?
> If I did pump up my Eizo's to
> 160, I would need sunglasses to work at them, and a bigger bank account
> to keep replacing them!!
Come on, Bob! 160 isn't much luminance to look at, in "normal" room
lighting. Remember that standard office lighting is 400 Lux. Also, 160 is
nothing compared to tons of users who never touched their old 23" ACD who
were factory-calibrated at 350 cd/m2. There, I agree, a good pair of
sunglasses would be required.
> Luckily for me, I don't have to comply with these 'standards'. As a
> photographer who prints for his own pleasure and the odd
> competition/exhibition, I don't need to do anything other than achieve
> a
> good match of screen to print, and I test those prints in the lighting
> to which they will be subjected in real life.
Lucky you!
> If you must have 160, then you should choose a manufacturer that makes
> them specifically to work at 160 - usually to watch films on? ;)
You should see the luminance of our home Samsung LCD 500 cd/m2!
Best / Roger
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden