Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: gwhitf on September 26, 2013, 11:36:38 pm
-
Does anyone in the US provide this service? I fedex my MacBook Pro (Mountain Lion) to someone, and they simply profile/calibrate the monitor and send it back to me?
If no one rents monitor profiling gear, could it work in reverse?
Thanks.
-
Does anyone in the US provide this service?
ColorMunki Display colorimeter price is <= $170.
-
I'm certain some provide this service but as far as I know, most if not all off the shelf products have a EULA that forbids this. Next, you have to conduct this process on a regular basis, say once a month. So it's kind of silly not to just purchase a product and do it yourself.
-
As someone who has offered this service since 1994, I think it's important to do it yourself and match paper white under the lighting conditions that you work in. Improving the lighting that you view prints with is an often overlooked and needed component to a smart workflow. All of these things and more need to come together for a well balanced workflow, so I can't recommend sending it off or taking it out of your environment for calibration. Spend the cash, do it right, and consider how all the pieces fit together.
-
As for EULA issues…..a Disc+ BasiC+ dongle sitelicens allow you to do whatever you want, wherever you want. Get payed or give away.100% freedom in this matter. Pretty generous and a good reason to go with that artillery. I was surprised and very happy to hear this about the tools. It comes directly from the source (K.K).
Since it's a laptop - and the internal screen - it will probably be used on location/fieldwork…… so I guess he/she will have the ambient allover the place, so to speak. If not dragging a lightbox with him. Ok, Solux then. Portable light, pocket sized ;) A simple choice on the D-scale would do in such case. Still, after all it's a laptopscreen…..
Must be a good reason for letting someone else do it. Wouldn't surprise me if it's a Retina with the typical red tint that has to be edited away manually. That extra process in itself will keep one from doing to often anyway. It's not that fun. You can't measure it away, you know….. Letting someone else do it would be ok if having the service next door or in the same city. Sending it away is probably a bit over the top. On the other hand we're sending other digital stuff for service all the time so why not. A shitty sensor for example, despite the fact that there are so many do it yourself-kits out there for cleaning. You don't want to mess with it and you don't have the time to spend on it to get it right. You rather pay and get it done well (hopefully).
Bump it over to europe here and I'll fix it. Or if you pay for my ticket, time and hotel, I'll take the next flight. I've done it since 1998 ;) I don't know how many probes you could by for that cost, but I'll pack my bag if you insist on it. Martin has 4 years more in the game (eyeballing at that time, right? Could come as a gift for the Retina), so he would probably be a better choice in the US. Oh, and that other old good fellow there, Andrew, how long has he been going on actually? ;)
Ok, back to the beer now. Have a nice evening you too.
-
As for EULA issues…..a Disc+ BasiC+ dongle sitelicens allow you to do whatever you want, wherever you want. DISCUS
It's called a DISCUS, it is 990 Euro or over $1000 US so at that price point, I'd hope you would have a more generous EULA. The package does not include a basICColor display license!
Even if you can come in and calibrate the OP's device without breaking a EULA, he's going to have to (want to) pay you to do this on a regular basis, displays are unstable devices. Or he could just buy his own instrument at a far lower cost and do the work himself.
-
Regarding EULA, it's good that I'm not in US.
Regarding buying the equipment, I agree it's better to buy it if you are serious about color consistency. But given the fact that most calibrate 4 times a year or less. And that is cheaper than buying the equipment (X-Rite i1 Display Pro 249$ / 238Eur). That's why such services exist in the first place.
Quality is entirely different subject. Most service providers never bother to certify their Job so that means a calibrated monitor can be very very bad. But the user will not know this.
It all depends where you are located and the local currency exchange rate compared to $ or Euro.
Did you notice that the price is not based on currency exchange between $ and Euro but nearly the same. That's what I hate about X-rite and their company price policy. Europeans are forced to buy from US pay original price in $ + VAT and that's 1/3rd cheaper than buying from EU.
-
Quality is entirely different subject. Most service providers never bother to certify their Job so that means a calibrated monitor can be very very bad. But the user will not know this.
Certificates like UDACT are meaningless IMO. The calibrated monitor can pass UDACT and such in flying colors, and still have nothing to do with a in a given viewing conditions print. The calibration sensor can be not precise, the viewing conditions can be wrong.
And - last but not least - the sad true is that even if you have the best monitor in the world and a lab grade spectroradiometer, set up everything in a perfect way, there's still no perfect match between the monitor and the print, because the CIE XYZ colorimetry is not perfect, so in the end you must often make final tweaks using visual evaluation.
-
Certificates like UDACT are meaningless IMO. The calibrated monitor can pass UDACT and such in flying colors, and still have nothing to do with a in a given viewing conditions print. The calibration sensor can be not precise, the viewing conditions can be wrong.
And - last but not least - the sad true is that even if you have the best monitor in the world and a lab grade spectroradiometer, set up everything in a perfect way, there's still no perfect match between the monitor and the print, because the CIE XYZ colorimetry is not perfect, so in the end you must often make final tweaks using visual evaluation.
Absolutely spot on analysis! Well said.
-
Andrew,
actually, no it's not about the Discus itself.
It's the sitelicens EULA…… a sitelic most often strictly means unlimited seats in one location, one company, as you very well know. You're not locked into this or anything else in this case. That's the point. That's what is generous.
The sitelicens is cut down to allmost half in price if dongle to the Discus itself. But the EULA goes for a separate dongle too. You pay around four-five full seats to get the unlimited sitelic if dongled to the Discus. Double that (approx)for an ordinary separate USB stick dongle. Even that is more than just ok. Not bad at all if doing it professionally, spread out at many locations, if you ask me. I don't think that you could use the free x-rite application in the same way (legally) even if you would pay for it….. so it kind of balancing things up in the end somehow. And… what is 990 € + sitelic 500€ for an unlimited workingtool, really? It's less than a 80-200/2.8 here or my little Leica M-28 lens (compare nicely to the Discus quality, by the way…). All these are workingtools. LongLifed.
Yes, not even one single seat is included with the Discus as you mentioned, the black version has one, though – and a hardcase but you pay for it since the price is higher. This part is really greedy. No doubt. Both could had been dongled with one free seat at least. The software would then be locked for any other probe. Again, if in need for a sitelic, the nice balance comes in. Regardless of what we think about the rest.
Of course, he/she has to recalibrate. But the question is how often would do so anyway on a laptop. Especially if having to edit a Retina profile to get it clean each time. If not a Retina IPS, the crappy viewangle on the "older" ones will kill the happiness over a calibrated screen anyway. That will be a larger variable for most users than the slow drifting of the backlight on a calibrated/profiled laptop….. Chasing that drift back and forth, day in and day, out is meaningless. Happy to at least be in the ballpark – or in the outer parts of it. In different locations, sportarenas or sitting in the hotelcorridor, one will bump the level up and down untill it feels normal to start editing/browsing. Counting the pushes on the button from max level downwards just to know where we are.
Of course he/she could be better off getting his own little probe and find a way to deal with the laptopscreen, spending all that time to find where he's got the sweetspot. Learn to handle the angle issues…. making some blackpointtargets for visual setting blackpoint by adjusting the angle…… and also deeply memorize differences between that little screen and a large wellcalibrated monitor at home. To be able to compensate in brain when out there in the field. Like it always has been done. It's an art in itself. Pulling in a laptopscreen well, most often takes *some level of fingertip feeling* and skills from loads of other screens. That goes very much for cal/profiling too. I even redo the Coloredges time after time untill my intuition is satisfied. The basic process is extremely easy to do for most people. But there are, many times, more to it than that……
If someone asks those questions, he's probably more focused on delivery and has less time for learning details. It's not that uncommon. "Just get it fixed for me so that I can browse my cards decently without that blue bottomhalf of the greyramp, that's all I want. I need it fixed yesterday. I don't know a shit about how". I do have a kind of respect for that simple wish too.
Get a probe if not having anyone nearby that can help. But people are having problem despite the easy to follow softare flow and well reviewed x-rites / spyders. How can that be?
This is a good discussion. Beacuse I can really understand why some hard working and stressed out people are asking for this simple service. Silly or not. That was what trigged my reaction to make some really short comments in the first place.
Just my two cents, like you americani use to say :)
Time for some wine.
Ciao.
-
Certificates like UDACT are meaningless IMO. The calibrated monitor can pass UDACT and such in flying colors, and still have nothing to do with a in a given viewing conditions print. The calibration sensor can be not precise, the viewing conditions can be wrong.
And - last but not least - the sad true is that even if you have the best monitor in the world and a lab grade spectroradiometer, set up everything in a perfect way, there's still no perfect match between the monitor and the print, because the CIE XYZ colorimetry is not perfect, so in the end you must often make final tweaks using visual evaluation.
Certificates like UDACT do not evaluate viewing conditions ! There is ISO/ANSI standards how to set that up correctly.
I never said that anyone should use UDACT, or that it's the best certification software there is. But it's funny how some companies make exactly the same as UDACT and charge 2000$ for it. Guess their clients are stupid to use it then.
-
You guys feel good about this unit, for modern glossy MacBookPro displays, as well as MacBook Pro Retina displays? And with Mountain Lion?
http://www.amazon.com/X-Rite-CMUNDIS-ColorMunki-Display/dp/B0055MBQOM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380542468&sr=8-1&keywords=ColorMunki+Display+colorimeter
Thanks.
-
You guys feel good about this unit, for modern glossy MacBookPro displays, as well as MacBook Pro Retina displays? And with Mountain Lion?
The hardware is excellent. The software, so-so. It is the same hardware as the i1Display-Pro but a different color, runs slower and has far inferior software compared to the Pro. For whatever reason, X-rite cripples the software with the same fine hardware and lowers the price. I think it's silly to do, software is kind of important depending on your goals (usually make a display and print match). Worse, there's no upgrade path from ColorMunki hardware to i1Display-Pro software. If you only concerned with Macbook Pro display used on location, the Munki should be fine. You're not trying to tame a good screen to print match due to screen and the fact it's all over the planet.
-
You guys feel good about this unit, for modern glossy MacBookPro displays, as well as MacBook Pro Retina displays? And with Mountain Lion?
http://www.amazon.com/X-Rite-CMUNDIS-ColorMunki-Display/dp/B0055MBQOM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380542468&sr=8-1&keywords=ColorMunki+Display+colorimeter
Thanks.
you shall be able to run a free Argyll w/ it, instead of a bundled software.
-
And…. there went my little cute flight over the pond right down the toilet. I had it in my hand. It stings.
As for the Munki, why not add what it takes to get the faster Pro instead. Can't be THAT much more.
Anyway, if you get into playmode, try the BasiCColor Display. The free Demo is full working 14 days. I promise -- the demo is full free. That's generous ;) You'll probably nailed that laptop within that timeframe. Both the x-rite probes works with it. But Discus doesn't work with the i1Profiler. Isn't that bloody unfair?! …… ColorNavigator does since a while back. That soothes. But ColorNavigator doesn't ride well with anything else than ColorEdges…… It's a mess……..and x-rite contributes on their side with OEM vs Retail versions of their probes. Thanks. We could need someone who can hack them all (making some universal adjustments about drivers and SDK's) (or crack? No, no…forget that…. I think that's a drug, sorry).
Ok, back to the Vodka.
PS. Munki and Argyll, well it can't get much slower now. But the result can be nice. Use an extra large number of patches too…..to be sure. And redo at least 10-15 times to get hang of differences between the settings. That's the only way to learn the tools and processes. No shortcuts! Even if it takes 'some' time, a couple of full (24h+24h+24h+24h) weekends perhaps.
Are you really, really sure you don't want me to pop over? :)
-
Both the x-rite probes works with it
AFAIK ColorMunki Display doesn't work with basICColor display, nor any other profiler (ColorNavigator, SpectraView) that's using X-Rite drivers.
ArgyllCMS is the only exception - but Graeme wrote his own drivers.
-
you shall be able to run a free Argyll w/ it, instead of a bundled software.
What's the advantage of using Argyll instead of the bundled ColorMunki photo software ?
-
Does anyone in the US provide this service? I fedex my MacBook Pro (Mountain Lion) to someone, and they simply profile/calibrate the monitor and send it back to me?
If no one rents monitor profiling gear, could it work in reverse?
Thanks.
You might want to consider a workshop where the instructor will show you how to do this yourself as part of the workshop. My workshops, depending on the person, run about 65-70% field work and 30-35% computer work. I encourage the students to bring their laptops so we can go over any software issues they may be having, perhaps ride their system of malware or settings that slow things down, and then we color profile.
In my area (Thailand and SEA) working outdoors is brutal and most guys on vacation can hardly wait to get back in the air conditioning because they're not used to it. So no surprise they really enjoy the computer time. :) The two things they enjoy the most about computer time is getting their computer running with the best possible color, and finally seeing their images come alive when properly exposed and processed.
Workshops, at least on my level are much about value. Learning to take great images is a given, but helping them with long standing questions about their computer, maybe something they really want to know but have given up (layers is common), and then allowing them to use gear before they buy (lenses, perhaps a pro level body, OEM speedlights vs. Quantum/etc) also adds value. Of course you can't spend a great amount of time in any of these areas, but I've had many take a 2nd or 3rd individual workshop so they can ask questions the entire time.
So maybe this is an opportunity where you can get more than you asked for..
-
Marcin,
sorry, it's the Colormunki SPECTRO that is supported by BasiCColor. Colpa mia! Thanks for the correction. Just another reason to step up a few "bucks" or Euros to get the noncrippled version. We also have the OEM/Retail issue to consider in that one. Even though that might been sorted out in some camps. I dunno. Still, hooking up an OEM on iProfiler will probably be dead end forever.
But who f…. cares, back to the martini ;)
PS. "So maybe this is an opportunity where you can get more than you asked for.." Are you trying to take my business from me? You evil boy, go away! I was here first ;) Hehe..
-
Retina with the typical red tint that has to be edited away manually. That extra process in itself will keep one from doing to often anyway. It's not that fun. You can't measure it away, you know…
BTW yes, you can measure it away - CIE 1964 10° observer
-
Marcin,
I'm not sure I remember exacly what I did in the year of 1964 but it must had been with some very useful toys that I forgot…. ;)
Ok, somwhere I recall I have some PDF's from Eizo talking about the diff that can occur in whitepoint - even when targeting to the very same values - between a "normal" gamut monitor and a larger sized gamut (I'm not sure but in their example I think they considered Adobe RGB gamut as widegamut). Changing to 10 degrees observer angle by choosing the "monitor matching" option in Colornavigator would help balancing the whitepointnailing between the monitors. I think this option came in some of the latest version of Colornavigator. I haven't used it. Is this larger observer angle what you're pointing at as a fix for the Retina? I'm in the wrong place to find those papers now.
Please describe an effective workflow/workaround that can be used within a decent timeframe (you know damn well what I mean;) when not using Colornavigator on the *Edges……. messing around with Babelcolor or Excel sheets to recount a profiles coordinates or anything like that isn't appreciated at client places. The clock is ticking money loudly. I rather pull curves in BasiCColor then. I use one eye open first, then close it and open the other as a referens-validation. That's what I call precision from experince…. :o
One has to use the Spectro to zero in the whitepoint, right? No workarounds for the Discus?
A longshot; measuring not directly on the surface of the Retina, but from say 30 cm distance would that mimic the whole thing or does it take a softwaresetting/workaround to make use of the 10 degree effect? Ok, ambient problems, making the room dark and all that, bout would it mimic for the observer angle effect? I could do it in the dark toilet on my knees if I have to. The MacBook laptop Retina I mean.
Tablebased profiles ok -- or matrix only?
Keep it simple, I'm not that intelligent. I'm just cocky ;)
Thanks
-
FWIW - I calibrate my own rMBP 13 with ArgyllCMS using -Q 1964_10 flag and i1Pro2. Once you calibrate it you can measure the x,y with DISCUS and use them as a target in basICColor.
Playing with different observers in Argyll can generally bring interesting results. Didn't found the golden rule that solves all the problems automagically, and I'm too lazy, too stupid and too much drinking to even try to understand and evaluate it. But I started to suspect that NEC/EIZO/X-Rite(?) folks seem to use different observers to get visual match between displays with different backlight spectra, and noticed that it works pretty darn well in EIZO ColorNavigator or NEC MultiProfiler / OSD in P/PA series with 3DLUT.
Marcin,
I'm not sure I remember exacly what I did in the year of 1964 but it must had been with some very useful toys that I forgot…. ;)
Ok, somwhere I recall I have some PDF's from Eizo talking about the diff that can occur in whitepoint - even when targeting to the very same values - between a "normal" gamut monitor and a larger sized gamut (I'm not sure but in their example I think they considered Adobe RGB gamut as widegamut). Changing to 10 degrees observer angle by choosing the "monitor matching" option in Colornavigator would help balancing the whitepointnailing between the monitors. I think this option came in some of the latest version of Colornavigator. I haven't used it. Is this larger observer angle what you're pointing at as a fix for the Retina? I'm in the wrong place to find those papers now.
Please describe an effective workflow/workaround that can be used within a decent timeframe (you know damn well what I mean;) when not using Colornavigator on the *Edges……. messing around with Babelcolor or Excel sheets to recount a profiles coordinates or anything like that isn't appreciated at client places. The clock is ticking money loudly. I rather pull curves in BasiCColor then. I use one eye open first, then close it and open the other as a referens-validation. That's what I call precision from experince…. :o
One has to use the Spectro to zero in the whitepoint, right? No workarounds for the Discus?
A longshot; measuring not directly on the surface of the Retina, but from say 30 cm distance would that mimic the whole thing or does it take a softwaresetting/workaround to make use of the 10 degree effect? Ok, ambient problems, making the room dark and all that, bout would it mimic for the observer angle effect? I could do it in the dark toilet on my knees if I have to. The MacBook laptop Retina I mean.
Tablebased profiles ok -- or matrix only?
Keep it simple, I'm not that intelligent. I'm just cocky ;)
Thanks
-
Ahh, I suspected that Argyll was lurking around there at your place. I'll look into that when having a Retina here offlocation next time for calibration/profiling without hurry. Very good to know. And the fact that the concept seems be around here and there in the other apps in one way or another.
Does anyone know yet why this redtint is so typical for the Retinas?
A little off topic thing that just pops up in my mind without any particular reason: If you're using BasiCColor Display you can easily add more patches by digging up this following file and edit it to your liking. Nice for the LUT profiles. The iProfiler display target patches is quite fun to copy into BasiCColor existing patchfile on the mac. Takes some time and patient, though. The "small target" has more than double amount of patches than the original BC target. The medium 4 times. One can also add more "closer" patches in the lower part of the neutral greyramp for example..... makes any difference? I feel that the "small" i1Profiler target actually does as is:
BasiCColor5 > ( show content/package) > Contents > Resources > Monitor RGB.txt.
Okidoki, like Hanibal Lecter use to say. Time for a slice of meat (!) and some wine. Or I might go directly onto that bottle Lagavulin instead? Yes I think I do that.
Thanks for the information!
PS:
Coulden't help myself from googling half an hour here to find the whitepaper from Eizo if you're interested:
http://www.eizo.ch/netmanager/download/product/pdf/9b25f50d04c81d878c3d1210a2ca188e.pdf
-
What amazes me is that he we are in the year 2013, and we're still having conversations about monitor calibration. I remember these discussions back when the Canon D60 or 60D or whatever it was came out. It amazes me that either Apple, or someone, has not come up with an out-of-the-box solution to uniformity of color by now. We are still having this elementary discussion.
-
What amazes me is that he we are in the year 2013, and we're still having conversations about monitor calibration. I remember these discussions back when the Canon D60 or 60D or whatever it was came out. It amazes me that either Apple, or someone, has not come up with an out-of-the-box solution to uniformity of color by now. We are still having this elementary discussion.
Apple came out with a self calibrating display well over a decade ago (it wasn't very good). The issue is that one has to calibrate a display based on it's behavior and abilities, the viewing conditions it will be used within and the print next to that display someone desires to match. Lots of variables. One size doesn't fit all by a long shot. Profiling a display is pretty easy. Calibrating it to a behavior which is desirable and doing this consistently is more difficult. This is a bit like asking for an out of the box camera that always produces an image just as you desire. No need for editing, raw conversions etc. Sounds easy.
-
so i bought the color munki to calibrate this MacBookPro 13" glossy screen. Ran the software; worked great. Ran it at 120 lumens but seemed very dark. ran it again at 130. Both profiles seem noticeably warm in the greys.
whole process very frustrating. Why they give you choices in lumens. why they give you choices in CT's. I thought the whole thing was standardization and taking the subjectivity out of the equation.
2013 and we're still talking about this stuff.
FAIL.
-
That's to sad.
Why they give a choice for how bright the screen will target to and what CCT? Depending on your environment lighting and different standards. Go native CCT on that laptop and around 130 perhaps, using it on a well-lit sportarena; go 160. Darkened room while running the calibration!
Yes, the non-objective factor without any subjective involvement….. would be nice as well as having all monitors to respond exacly the same way on the same target set up. Isn't that what the package try to give as an impression?
The warm greyramp is probably the wellknown Retina effect. A kind of red tint. That's where even more subjective approaches come in. One has to by hand tune that shit away using the curves in a good calibrationsoftware…. a thing that not long ago was a total TABU. Well, tell us what to do then. I pull the curves till my face turn blue. No one wants that red tint (on the monitor).
Yes again, 2013. And some monitorbrands are now using swingout sensors doing the process by schedule at night once a week. Cool. People who know nothing about colormanagment feels safe without any afterchecks at all. – Hey, we're "calibrated" today…. think that little swingpoke was out on an adventure tonight, a little track in the dust down there! Yeah, the colors feel a bit different today, did a good job, and how is yours? Ahh, looks like mine did better!
The sensor is very good, still it takes the readings at a place where no one with a normal brain would take a reading. A few centimeters from the edge, where the most variations/changes appear due to temp fluctuations and more. That's where we stands today with one of the most respected brands. Given a choice to co-calibrate with another probe in the middle at the same time. (Take that as a confirmation on the problems involved even if they try to say that it is for other reasons).
Could we agree on the fact that the process of calibrating/profiling a monitor itself is quite simple, but somehow it takes a little bit more – no? Could that be why we're still talking about it?
Frustration, sure. Imaging how it feels in a room with 50 monitors in a lovely mix. HP's, Dell's and ColorEdges. "We need a match here. Oh and we also got these 8 years PC-laptops (TN) that we need very much on location. They don't look the same somehow. We need to trust our equipment, you see". Come on, THAT's where you start losing hair rapidly.
Experiment - every single day - with your monkey. In a few months you're on track and think it's not that bad after all = accepting ;)
Yes. I'm brutal some days ;)
-
I'm just a commercial photographer so what do I know. But this is the way i see all this. There seem to be at least two different reasons why you'd want to go to the extremes of having your monitor standardized. But the reasons for these two ways are quite different:
A. Closed Loop: You're in the business of making prints, and you want your monitor to match your printer. That's all you care about. You just want to tweak your image, and then send it properly to the printing software, and when the print pops out, it pretty much matches on the first print. (I am not this guy).
B. Open Loop: You're making images destined for outside clients, probably going to CMYK. You shoot a job, you retouch it, and you simply FTP the final file, and you never even make a proof. You just want to think, in your mind, that your monitor that sits on your desk "matches" some universal standard that exists around THE WORLD for the most part. IOW, if i opened that TIFF file in Pittsburg, or LA, or NYC, it would look the same in Photoshop. You simply want to FTP the file without getting a phone call from a pre press house or the ad agency, saying, "Wow, we love the picture, but boy, it sure does feel a tad light, and a tad magenta". (I am this guy).
So in theory, I want to buy a puck and some software that runs, and then it builds a profile, and that software does not give me ANY choices. The software says, "Screw you, you can't work in a bright room. Buy some blinds for your damn windows. We're not gonna read the ambient in your room and adjust OUR profile. YOU are going to change your room to adjust to ME". And the software also says, "Screw you -- the CT is 6500. There are no other choices. Deal with it. That is the universal standard".
When we started all this Digital Mess, ten years ago or so, this is where I thought it would all be headed, but it's just as random and non-standardized now, in 2013, as it ever was. Yeah, frustrating.
There should not be a Moving Target. The software should also have an option to say, "Your monitor sucks. It simply won't calibrate to a universal standard. You buy a real computer and a real monitor. Deal with it".
-
Yes, somebody needed to say that...
Reading this forum you'd think we all sat around our Epsons producing exhibition prints all the time, but there are many of us who make a print perhaps twice a year. The "B" guy fits me perfectly. All I want is to send out files that I know are good and will reproduce well on press.
Still, I'm not sure it has to be D65, or 120. I look at my monitor and look for "paper white", or something that I can translate in my head to represent paper white. That can be anything between, say, 5500 and 6500, and anything between, say, 90 and 130. There's just no way to have a perfectly standardized environment.
-
What amazes me is that he we are in the year 2013, and we're still having conversations about monitor calibration. I remember these discussions back when the Canon D60 or 60D or whatever it was came out. It amazes me that either Apple, or someone, has not come up with an out-of-the-box solution to uniformity of color by now. We are still having this elementary discussion.
Living in the US, I am amazed that you are amazed. Even compared to English units, the US is non-standard. The pint is different, the fluid once, the gallon. The paper sizes are totally weird…
Brian A