Re: Viewing lights, art and photography
Re: Viewing lights, art and photography
- Subject: Re: Viewing lights, art and photography
- From: edmund ronald <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 13:45:23 +0200
The profiling industry has been mainly driven by the printing press
guys and their lightbooths up to now;
I think we would have a short and easy win by getting display profiles
and prints to match prints better in everyday indoors lighting, rather
than going straight for the OBA problem - brightness adaptation has
more immediate effects.
Edmund
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Ernst Dinkla <email@hidden> wrote:
> On viewing light corresponding to display light etc.
>
> With increasing numbers of photographers using color management solutions
> for theitr digital workflow in smaller shops etc there could be a shift
> towards 4000-3000K display conditions that are not really covered with M1
> viewing light booths, M1 spectrometer standards and profile creation
> software that doesn't really go below D50 but a Tungsten setting. I can
> understand that the packaging industry likes to refine M1 standards but is
> an in general declining graphic industry defining here what is most urgent?
>
> Solux lamps are now used more often for viewing proofs etc, the UV content
> of the 4700K version should correspond more than the usual fluorescent lamp
> solutions do where almost all UV is converted to visible light. On the other
> hand the Solux lamps are used more often by photographers that will display
> their prints to halogen light at lower color temperatures including Solux
> lamps . Solux changed the 4100 and lower K models so their ouput is low on
> UV now to reduce fading of art even more. Looks like the choices of viewing
> light have to be made carefully too when using Solux lamps, generations and
> color temperature models vary. UV-cut framing glass can not be ignored
> either.
>
> There is a better understanding of FBA effects in color management
> especially their higher color inconstancy to changing light. FBA papers on
> average are more prone to light and gas fading. Their dependence on UV light
> also exposes them to the most fade active kind of light. There is a tendency
> now to avoid FBA papers in photography and art for the reasons sketched. To
> define/improve UV content in viewing lights etc may be wasted time for that
> part of the market. Papers without FBA and UV-cut display illumination is
> the goal there.
>
> Display conditions for photography will change soon enough again. As I
> understand it the LCD, E-paper, Electro Wetting, OLED, displays will all
> have different native color temperatures and right now few have a CM
> integrated. There will be reflective, transmissive and hybrid displays. Some
> with backpanel lighting, other ones are self emitting.
>
> With standards for 6500K - 5000K +/-UV more or less defined it may be time
> to cover lower color temperatures with standards and features in hardware
> and software to cover the full range. Tungsten is just one choice in that
> range and not always available. I did read that some Canons have 4000K
> optimised printer profiles.
>
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
>
>
> Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions
>
> | Dinkla Grafische Techniek |
> | www.pigment-print.com |
> | ( unvollendet ) |
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
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