Print size and its perceived brightness

[picturesfromthelow]

Hi,
is it correct to say that a picture will look brighter the bigger we print it? It should collect more total light when printed bigger, right?
I'm asking this because that is what my eyes tell me. Whenever I check the softproof view in Lightroom against the actual print, I always find that bigger prints do look brighter than the softproof, where the softproof tends to be spot on on smaller sized prints. I then think if it would be advisable to create various monitor profiles, with different brightness values, to take print size into account. 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Hi,
is it correct to say that a picture will look brighter the bigger we print it? It should collect more total light when printed bigger, right?

Hi,

No, while the larger surface does receive more light, it is also spread out over a larger surface. The only thing that matters is the reflectance of the printed surface.

I'm asking this because that is what my eyes tell me. Whenever I check the softproof view in Lightroom against the actual print, I always find that bigger prints do look brighter than the softproof, where the softproof tends to be spot on on smaller sized prints. I then think if it would be advisable to create various monitor profiles, with different brightness values, to take print size into account.

Difficult to say from a distance (pun intended), but make sure that your viewing conditions are matched to how your display is calibrated. Depending on the output size and viewing distance/surroundings, the eye may accommodate to different viewing angles and ambient light.

Cheers,
Bart

[Ernst Dinkla]

Hi,
is it correct to say that a picture will look brighter the bigger we print it? It should collect more total light when printed bigger, right?
I'm asking this because that is what my eyes tell me. Whenever I check the softproof view in Lightroom against the actual print, I always find that bigger prints do look brighter than the softproof, where the softproof tends to be spot on on smaller sized prints. I then think if it would be advisable to create various monitor profiles, with different brightness values, to take print size into account.

I guess images of the prints you have the experience with are relatively light scenes, I doubt it happens with darker scenes. There should not be a difference but it can depend on what your eye's reference in or near the print is.  Best way to test it should be the same image prints with a wide border that has the average Lab L value of the image. Or the smaller print integrated in the large print. Compare the prints themselves, not to the monitor.

Some tricks on walls, mattes, border colors and/or masked lighting of the print are used to enhance the print's contrast to the surrounding area. The same eye reference as a base for it.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Stephen Girimont]

My personal experience leads me to believe there may be a psychological effect at work. The first time I had a 40x60 canvas print made, when I took delivery of it my first thought was "that's too light!" Yet when I placed a 20x30 canvas print that I had made myself right next to the larger one, they were an exact match. (The large canvas was printed by Simply Color Lab and I chose them specifically because they use printers that are simply larger versions of my own Epson and they print with the same canvas I do).

[MHMG]

Some tricks on walls, mattes, border colors and/or masked lighting of the print are used to enhance the print's contrast to the surrounding area. The same eye reference as a base for it.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

The effect of surround can indeed influence the perceived brightness of colors and tones in an image. The technical term for this phenomenon is called "lateral adaptation". As lighter values in an image get surrounded by darker values and as the lighter values subtend smaller angle of view to the human observer, the lighter tones are perceived to be brighter. Artists such as Rembrandt have used this visual "trick" for centuries to make highlights in artwork appear to take on a brilliant "glow" in the mind of the viewer. Lateral adaptation does not end at the edge of the image. As Ernst has noted, curators, framers, lighting designers,etc will consider matte board, wall color, and illumination surrounding the artwork in presenting the piece to the public because those areas entering our angle of view also become part of our visual brightness adaptation to the work.  Likewise, as an image gets printed larger and larger, and the viewer can walk up to it where it then subtends a much greater fill area in the viewer's eyes, the image itself can begin to function more and more as its own surround condition. Thus, bigger prints can indeed appear brighter under certain viewing conditions than smaller prints of the same image.

The attached screenshot demonstrates the lateral adaptation effect. The the rectangular bar in the middle of the image is comprised of pixels having entirely the same RBG value yet appears visually darker on one end and lighter on the other due to the effect of the surrounding tonal gradient.  The screenshot was taken from a test target I designed for checking monitor calibration You can get the whole test target here: http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/monitorchecker/  To download the target one needs to be an Aardenburg member, but membership is free. The Aardenburg MonitorChecker target was also formatted for use in Photoshop.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com