New monitor - calibrated - prints are still dark/contrasty

[Garnick]

if someone has a URL for a 5000K (or adjustable) LED lamp w/ high CRI, pls post it.

+1 

Gary

[Mike Guilbault]

Gary             
 

I'm pretty sure I followed the guides when I first set up the monitor, but it may be worthwhile starting from scratch again. I've set up a few different calibrations for different papers I'm using, according to the article at DigitalDog - makes a lot of sense in how Andrew describes it.

Those look great, but it's the Lyve canvas that I'm having trouble with now. The Reds are coming out Orange and too much contrast. I don't know if it's the profile (I have two different profiles from BC for Lyve and they both look the same) or something else. At this point my head is kinda muddled with colour - I don't know if I can trust my eyes. lol

[dchew]

After printing on the exact same printer for 8+ years, I think there is another factor with this prints are too dark issue: We need to train ourselves. I still occasionally catch myself digitally developing an image that really is too dark. I can somewhat get away with in on screen. Heck, sometimes images I post on-line get rave reviews. Then after several months I go to print that image and it is too dark. But it's not really the print that is too dark, it is the image.

Dave

[Doug Gray]

After printing on the exact same printer for 8+ years, I think there is another factor with this prints are too dark issue: We need to train ourselves. I still occasionally catch myself digitally developing an image that really is too dark. I can somewhat get away with in on screen. Heck, sometimes images I post on-line get rave reviews. Then after several months I go to print that image and it is too dark. But it's not really the print that is too dark, it is the image.

Dave

I separate out the issue of printing, and "too dark," issues from the monitor surround, and hard/soft proofing by the simple expedient of printing a known reference image.

The advantage of a known reference image is that comparing them is, for the most part, not dependent on the illuminant.  A previously created reference image and a print of the same will appear to be identical outside of possible metameric failure. The latter only occurs if the spectral response of the print and reference image differs materially and it usually is a secondary effect at most and is always insignificant if the paper has no OBs and the two are viewed in daylight.

My reference image of choice is a ColorChecker and the compared print is a print of the same ColorChecker image using Absolute Colorimetric.  When I do that I don't even look at the CC image on the monitor. It's monitor appearance has no affect on printing. If the print and Colorchecker match, and they will if color management including the profile is correct, then any and all issues of prints being too dark, etc., are due to editing and viewing on the monitor side. It's that simple.

[Jim Kasson]

For what it's worth I did a test with a Solux running at 4200K v monitor.  The right hand side of the monitor was covered with a highly flat reflectance paper and illuminated at 45 degrees by the Solux. The left hand side was adjusted so that the XYZ from a spectro matched that of the right hand side reflected light from the Solux. The perceived chromaticity and brightness between the left and right side were quite a close match. At least within less than a couple hundred Kelvin max. If the narrow spectra of the monitor v the broad spectra of the reflected light on the right side created different color temps (like D50 v D65) then I would not have expected them to match,

Metameric matches under different illuminants can exist perfectly well with spiky and smooth spectra, and if those matches are obtained for a sample that is the white point for the image, the white point is defined by the same filter response as that which converts the rest of the image to triplets. Therefore, wide vs narrow spectral responses will not shift the white point.

I think you're saying that you don't observe such a shift.

In all of the soft proofing studies that I know of that presented the monitor and the proof print in the same field of view an a way that forced a single adaptation, the white point of the print and that of the monitor had to be the same for effective soft proofing.

That said, I'm somewhat astonished at the perceptual similarity of D65 monitor image v a D50 illuminated image. That motivated doing the above test. I'm not sure exactly what causes the perceptual similarity but when an broadband illuminated white object is brought within an inch or less of a screen patch with the same measured XYZ values there is a sudden perceptual jump to a match. When they are distinctly separate physically, the two look way different.

You're talking about adaptation plasticity. And yes, it's pretty amazing. Which is why you can get away with soft proofing for D50 illumination on a D65 monitor.

Jim

[scyth]

if someone has a URL for a 5000K (or adjustable) LED lamp w/ high CRI, pls post it.

http://indiecinemaacademy.com/complete-led-color-database-cri-tlci-cqs-tm30-15/

you can use a LED panel too in the office

[Doug Gray]

Metameric matches under different illuminants can exist perfectly well with spiky and smooth spectra, and if those matches are obtained for a sample that is the white point for the image, the white point is defined by the same filter response as that which converts the rest of the image to triplets. Therefore, wide vs narrow spectral responses will not shift the white point.

I think you're saying that you don't observe such a shift.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying.

[Wayne Fox]

if someone has a URL for a 5000K (or adjustable) LED lamp w/ high CRI, pls post it.

I’ve tried solux bulbs at different temperatures.  I’ve moved away from lamps that are too cool, I struggle with how cold the image looks. 

I’ve been testing bulbs from Lumicrest and comparing them to the solux.  The CRI rating is one of the highest I’ve seen in an LED (95) but also looking at the individual measuements and detail of the rating they seem to be pretty solid in all 15 wavelengths that are tested.  I’ve been pretty happy with them.  I actually prefer the 3000k bulbs over the 4000k.

[Mike Guilbault]

Well, for whatever reason I can't get a good print out of Lyve canvas. I tried some Epson Exhibition Canvas Matte that I had and it printed beautifully. Almost a perfect match for the monitor. On the Lyve canvas, it really dumped a lot of ink on it - so much that it felt very wet after printing. I've never felt it this wet before.

I think I've got it under control now. Thanks guys for all the help and suggestions. I learned a lot over the last few days.

[howardm]

I replaced the original 4700K Solux w/ their 3500 and like it.  It matches my 3000K living room well.  I also have one of  those cheap Amazon 4temp, 5intensity level LED desk lamps.