The thing is that if you set up your monitor for proofing (80 cd/m2), then you also would need to make sure that the contrast ratio is somewhere max. 200:1, which would also involve black level, and so and so on.
Another issue with having brightness too low is that you might have a monitor that cannot 'natively' display such a low brightness and needs to adjust other parameters in order to allow for such a low brightness. Modifying those other parameters (depends on monitor, might be rgb levels) usually means that as Graeme said earlier color accuracy may/will be sacrificed... So in short, whatever you do, it's going to be a compromise anyway, unless you spend an inordinate amount of money to get everything (lighting, walls, booths, etc. etc.) within 'spec'.
My setup is to have my monitor usually at 120, unless tired eyes interfere, in which case I tone it down to 100. BTW, If you feel 120 is (way) too bright, it might just be that your ambient lighting is too dim. Add another ambient lightbulb somewhere and you'll start to notice 120 might not be that bright after all... For the sake of your eyes it's also a good idea to not have too much contrast in your environment, only leads to tired eyes and premature aging :)
Kind regards, Ridouan. On 03-02-2012 05:01, Roger Breton wrote:
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...
