dave2-8-0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As a working professional photographer, college
> level photo instructor, and professional digital
> printer and graphic artist. Shot my first paid
> wedding in 1965. That said:
>
> Viewing high quality modern digital images on
> anything but a high quality calibrated monitor,
> may give you a view that does not represent the
> true image.
>
> Any monitor that has not been calibrated within
> the previous two weeks, may give you less then a
> true image. Using a non calibrated monitor to
> edit and adjust your images, may have your images
> looking good on your monitor, but the same image
> on other monitors may well look greatly different
> then the original scene.
>
> I personally have had paying clients complain
> about the quality of some images. Having them
> view the same image on a pro grade monitor,
> convinced them that it was their monitor that was
> the problem.
And = If I might add... If you're using an on-board or Intel based integrated graphics card, the best monitor in the world can still look, well, weak. A good quality video card(s) can make all the difference in the world. I'm using a pair of Radeon R9 280X cards in CrossfireX with four monitors, two Samsung, two LG. And I live in Colorado. There is a huge difference in colors between the Samsung and LG monitors, especially the blue ski. The Samsung is darker and duller, the LG is brighter, but less realistic looking, but looking out my living room window, surprisingly more accurate. I've also sent pictures to a friend in the UK, and he has absolutely insisted that "mountains aren't blue" and the sky isn't that color, and there must be something wrong with my camera...
Thanks,
Robert
