Hi Tim,
thank you for your reply.
> Print viewing light as it has been said many times should have the white of the paper viewed under the lights the same brightness as the white of a 255RGB display white.
That formula is new to me - obviously, I have not read enough - or don't remember enough - I'm afraid the latter in particular ... :-(
That would be EV 9 1/3 in my case, 1576 Lux. That seems to refer to critical print viewing in a booth and is far beyond what can be exspected in a normal home, including my own, or in a gallery. For the latter, Ernst Dinkla has mentioned figures down to about 300 lux (quoted by memory), EV 7. But my question is not print viewing, it's the surround light for monitor viewing. As said, in my experience, it makes a huge difference.
Hi Garnick,
thank you for your extensive answer.
Hm, I had hoped to replace 'hard proofing' by soft proofing. My print service is very good I think (I have recently experienced another one for a few small images, and some difference!).
Maybe instead of sending 20 files at a time, I will send them more drop wise?
Hi Andrew,
first off: Great to see you back on this forum - good that you changed your mind!
Unfortunately I can't reproduce the monitor black test you describe on my system, using PhotoLine instead of Photoshop - I can't get rid of the image border even in full screen mode.
Karl Lang's whitepaper gave me something to think of. Strange that I have never read it before (or don't I just remember ??). In particular new to me is that the monitor dynamic range has to match the DR of the paper. I can't do that on my Eizo. Do I need an Artisan?
I can't find any for sale. Is it discontinued? If so, is there a successor?
I don't quite understand what you mean by "Of course, you will calibrate for that non changing ambient light for whatever goal you have for said calibration." I can calibrate the screen for a black level (the lowest, 0.2 cd/m2) and a white point, but not for brightness of the ambient light.
Even though I can't imagine that the black darkroom will work, since it is in conflict with my experience - since you and Karl Lang say it, I'll try it, cautiously with one or a few images at a time. If they are too dark, I'll blame it on you ;-)
Good light! - Hening