[argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration
- From: Roger Breton <graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:01:55 -0500
ISO-12646 suggests that 80 is good Luminance for screen to proof, even
today. 120 can be used too.
Bottom line, trust the adapting visual mechanism to show us a good visual
match to a proof, even at the lower calibrated luminance.
/ Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Philip Reed
Sent: February-02-12 7:49 PM
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration
Hi Adam,
80 is quite a bit dimmer than 120. I have a Dell Ultrasharp U2711 and
calibrate to 120. If I went with 80, I would not be able to see detail in
the dark areas or shadows and I get good matches with my prints. This
however seems to be a very subjective topic and also depends on your ambient
lighting conditions. I tend to edit photos at night with no artificial
lights.
Regards - Phil (no guru either)
-----Original Message-----
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of adam k
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 7:35 PM
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration
I know that this group is full of gurus. I'm novice though. Is 80
cd/m^2 brighter than 120 cd/m^2?
A Kielcz
On Feb 2, 2012, at 6:35 PM, "János, Tóth F." <janos666@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It does make sense for me as my plasma display can not reach more than
> ~85 cd/m^2 anyway. But this is enough in a dark room.
> 80 cd/m^2 is a little too bright for web pages with bright backgrounds
> and black text but usually optimal for most of the movies and games.
> In a dark room which is actually not that dark if you have white walls
> and there is something on a relatively big display...
>
Other related posts:
