Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 5/25/2010 6:11 PM, Ken Carney wrote: > On 5/24/2010 8:28 PM, Tina Manley wrote: >> PESO: >> >> Another one from Charleston, with the M8. >> >> http://www.pbase.com/image/124891037 >> >> One one monitor it looks too saturated, on the other not. ? Maybe it's >> time to recalibrate but which one? >> >> <http://www.pbase.com/image/124891037>C&C greatly appreciated. >> > Both? > > Ken Carney > Oklahoma City, Oklahoma > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > After I replied, I remembered some information in the scant documentation for ColorEyes Display Pro, the software I use. I use two monitors, but only one is calibrated. The second just carries the PS tools palette. According to ColorEyes, we have two software choices for the black point. One is absolute rendering, the other is relative rendering. Evidently only absolute rendering will allow matching of monitors, and then only for "high quality" monitors. In absolute rendering, zero RGB is sent to the monitor as such. In relative rendering, the software maps the darkest values relative to its ability to display them. Evidently I have a lower quality monitor, since if I select absolute rendering, the blacks are blocked. So, I use relative rendering with minimum luminance, which gives good results but will not allow two monitors to be exactly matched. So, matching monitors is more difficult than I thought. So, again I wonder - what do people see on their monitors compared to mine? I know that with an accurate paper profile I can have the printer match what I see on the monitor, so all is reasonably well there. Maybe a color workflow match over the internet is not to be? Much to learn as always. Ken Carney Oklahoma City, Oklahoma